Elon Musk reveals Twitter's censorship practices

On Friday, Musk shared Twitter's internal documents with journalist Matt Taibbi.

Whether you personally use Twitter or not, you’ll want to pay attention to what Elon Musk is doing as the new owner of the blue bird app.

Musk has been busy since he officially purchased the company in October: he fired thousands of employees (including the CEO), reinstated previously suspended accounts like Jordan Peterson’s and Donald Trump’s, banned Kanye West for inciting violence, and met with CEO Tim Cook to restore Apple’s business relationship with Twitter.

Musk’s most consequential action so far may be his decision to release thousands of internal documents concerning Twitter’s censorship practices under previous ownership. The first batch of files were shared with journalist and fellow substacker Matt Taibbi on Friday. The documents are from fall 2020, in the lead up to the last U.S. presidential election.

Taibbi shared some of the documents in a Twitter thread. It provides a window into the political biases that influenced one of the most powerful big tech firms in the world. Below are a few highlights that I think are most revealing.

First, Taibbi explains the mechanism by which politicians and political parties could communicate their concerns to Twitter. In one example from October 2020, the Biden campaign sent a list of tweets to an unnamed Twitter employee. That unnamed employee forwarded the tweets to a colleague who then confirms that the request for review was “handled.”

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

8. By 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine. One executive would write to another: “More to review from the Biden team.” The reply would come back: “Handled.”

In another example from October 2020, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) flagged two tweets to a Twitter employee. One of those tweets that the DNC was worried about is from Hollywood actor James Woods, perhaps best known for his roles in Salvador and Ghosts of Mississippi (or, for less sophisticated individuals like me, you might know Woods for his appearances on Family Guy).

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

9. Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party:

Importantly, Taibbi notes that Republican Party officials and the Trump campaign could contact Twitter, too. However, he explains that the “system wasn’t balanced.” Twitter staff had “overwhelmingly” more relationships with Democrats than with Republicans, so Democrats had more access to Twitter’s censors.

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

11. This system wasn't balanced. It was based on contacts. Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right. opensecrets.org/orgs/twitter/s…

This dynamic provides context for one of the most controversial moments of the 2020 presidential election, when Twitter censored users from posting an article published by the New York Post about Joe Buden’s son, Hunter Biden, and the contents of Hunter’s missing laptop (more on that story here for those who might be unfamiliar). Taibbi explains Twitter’s response:

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

18. Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be “unsafe.” They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography.

And Taibbi documents the incoherence of Twitter’s decision to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story:

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

23. The decision was made at the highest levels of the company, but without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, with former head of legal, policy and trust Vijaya Gadde playing a key role.

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi

24. “They just freelanced it,” is how one former employee characterized the decision. “Hacking was the excuse, but within a few hours, pretty much everyone realized that wasn’t going to hold. But no one had the guts to reverse it.”

Musk has said that additional internal documents have been shared with Taibbi and another substack journalist, Bari Weiss. It appears that the saga will continue and more information will be available soon.

Stay tuned.