No one asked for 280-character tweets or 50-character usernames, but Twitter was happy to spring those on people whose only stated wish has been for some sort of edit button on the service (and maybe easing up on the ban hammer where conservatives are concerned).
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey hasn’t heard those calls for an edit button, but he did catch President Donald Trump’s tweet on the shooting at YouTube headquarters in California this week.
Was just briefed on the shooting at YouTube’s HQ in San Bruno, California. Our thoughts and prayers are with everybody involved. Thank you to our phenomenal Law Enforcement Officers and First Responders that are currently on the scene.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 3, 2018
We can’t keep being reactive to this, thinking and praying it won’t happen again at our schools, jobs, or our community spots. It’s beyond time to evolve our policies. This is a simple and reasonable approach, and it won’t solve all, but it’s a good start: https://t.co/ADYalbaO57 https://t.co/nbXpH9DDyT
— jack (@jack) April 3, 2018
What’s a good start? Well, according to Dorsey, the very-ambiguously worded 5-point plan posted on the March For Our Lives website, which calls for a ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and “a comprehensive assault weapons ban that prohibits the future production and sale of these weapons and provides a solution for dealing with those assault weapons that are already owned, such as a buyback program or registration.”
Like we said, the wording is ambiguous, but from the speeches at the D.C. march and from tweets from Parkland survivors, you can bet the AR-15 is considered “an assault weapon.”
Maybe figure out how to keep your dumb app from freezing every three and a half minutes before tackling the Bill of Rights. https://t.co/xJatzT5Mhh
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) April 4, 2018
https://twitter.com/BKeachDay/status/981715609414193152
"We" aren't being reactive
"We" are simply not engaging with you whatsoever, regardless of how simple, reasonable and evolved you think you are
"We" also have quite a different idea of what would be a "good start" https://t.co/Px4UznIzmV— Michael Malice (@michaelmalice) April 5, 2018
I'll "react," and you can sit tight in a gun-free zone. https://t.co/5wANwSKK1l
— Erielle Davidson (@politicalelle) April 5, 2018
Actually, @jack, we can. Your platform is an echo chamber and thus has no actual impact or influence on policy or the future. President @realDonaldTrump on the other hand, actually does have power of influence. Hey, A for effort though! https://t.co/jP9EG4Pn1W
— Sarah Reynolds (@Sarah__Reynolds) April 4, 2018
@jack is the true reactionary. He imagines the "thoughts and prayers" crowd is what's holding everyone back while he and who he supports attack the rights of the innocent while they ignore those who failed the children for political purposes. https://t.co/xztttYswl7
— Smokin Monkey (@ARaised_Eyebrow) April 5, 2018
Where does this site get a reputation for bias? https://t.co/DcpIc5y0pt
— Anthony Bialy (@AnthonyBialy) April 4, 2018
Thumb meet scale https://t.co/l9TG6hhk5A
— Pouncing Joe Pilot, MD (@JoeSilverman7) April 5, 2018
Twitter's founder shows us exactly why his company verified & promoted anti-gun student activists like David Hogg:
He wants more chicago-style #guncontrol, followed undoubtedly by Australia style gun confiscation.
& he'll trample the #1stAmendment
to do it#2A #2ndAmendment https://t.co/klF9qpwH47— Corey Stewart (@CoreyStewartVA) April 5, 2018
Weird. I don't remember you publicly supporting @KyleKashuv and the bill he was pushing. Wonder why? https://t.co/aUqFJaUJFq
— Senate Popular VotEEE (@EEElverhoy) April 4, 2018
In all fairness Jack, you have no clue what happened at Youtube HQ. You have no solutions that would have prevented it from happening. Yet here you are mindlessly pushing feel-good do-nothing knee-jerk guncontrol talking points. Grow up bruh? https://t.co/eovcC1PXnR
— Μολὼν Λαβέ (@M0L0NL4BE) April 4, 2018
Call me once you've required every workplace under your own control to have adequate basic security measures, especially given your company's high profile and overt, divisive, politicized activism.
Staff can sue, you know. https://t.co/QRPuEv5lbH
— Hurricane Watcher (@GodlessNZ) April 5, 2018
I'm with @jack. We must ban @peta. https://t.co/5DkfH4hk83
— Currently between fraudulent suspensions (@jtLOL) April 4, 2018
So, what else has @jack been up to this week to make the world a safer place?
Launching a new study today with @SusanBenesch and @dangerousspeech to help diminish abuse on Twitter. It’s a simple idea, and we have an open and accountable way to share the findings. https://t.co/aH2KCWJiRd
— jack (@jack) April 6, 2018
Diminish abuse on Twitter? Like disagreeing with Parkland activists when they call NRA members terrorists and murderers? And what or whom is @dangerousspeech?
Harvard’s Susan Benesch, who will help direct the study, “founded and directs the Dangerous Speech Project, which studies speech that can inspire violence — and ways to prevent such harm, without infringing on freedom of expression.”
Online abuse has become so widespread and pervasive that it poses a serious challenge to public welfare around the world. Like other complex social problems, it requires a rigorous, multifarious search for solutions. It can’t be solved merely by trying to delete all the harmful content online (even if this were technically possible to achieve) since even such draconian policies would not prevent more content from causing harm. It’s like recalling unsafe foods without preventing new food from being contaminated and sold — or towing away crashed cars without trying to make new cars safer.
It’s like calling for new gun laws without enforcing the ones on the books.
Um, yeah, can we just get that edit button now and work out speech for ourselves?
"Today Twitter will begin testing such an idea: that showing an internet platform’s rules to users will improve behavior on that platform..research has shown that when institutions publish rules clearly, people are more likely to follow them" https://t.co/sS1VfjN6xZ
— Courtney Norris (@courtneyknorris) April 6, 2018
"Dangerous speech" = any speech Jack dislikes.
He wants to use software to identify "dangerous speech" so that he can claim Twitter's censorship and suspensions are uncontrived, but of course he and his Republican-hating friends are creating the software.https://t.co/k9ii7ibwoL— Philip Schuyler (@FiveRights) April 7, 2018
SOUNDS good as long as it goes BOTH WAYS…ever see Rob Reiner’s Tweets? Kimmel?
PURE HATRED! https://t.co/U7ofuqlLEF
— VelvetONE (@one2velvet) April 7, 2018
There are a number of issues with this…. https://t.co/4TXDCqxAf9
— Dawn. A. Alderson (@dawn_alderson) April 6, 2018
https://twitter.com/yarnkitten/status/982531012398927872
Be honest and say that you’re looking for more ways to diminish other people’s opinions that differ from yours. https://t.co/zYixazd1mJ
— Tobias (@TrinidadTobz) April 7, 2018
https://twitter.com/ReneeofSoCalif/status/982435312709263361
Related:
NBD, just Jack Dorsey and a Twitter board member sharing an article on how Dems should and will win the 'New Civil War' https://t.co/NC6iGEqh2H
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) April 7, 2018
Join the conversation as a VIP Member