Your seemed to imply above that the SVP got involved because of already-flagged tweets, whereas the part of the story you've quoted happened after the SVP had n

Your seemed to imply above that the SVP got involved because of already-flagged tweets, whereas the part of the story you've quoted happened after the SVP had not only met the author and appointed him to the company's social media council, but after the SVP started ghosting him. The causality you're implying (if not explying) seems inverted.