Who convinced Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg to kick Donald Trump off of their platforms last week?
Activists and organizers at Twitter and Facebook say it was pressure from employees. PR reps for the companies say thats not the case, and that the leaders of those companies made the call on their own.
Kevin Roose thinks the answer is somewhere in the middle.
On the one hand, the New York Times tech columnist says, the calls were partly the result of employee lobbying.
An underreported part of the Twitter-banning-Donald-Trump decision was that the day before, a group of hundreds of Twitter employees had basically sent a letter to Jack Dorsey making it clear that they didnt want to work at a company that provided a platform for an insurrectionist, Roose told me on this weeks episode of Recode Media. And employees at Facebook have been agitating for harsher punishments for Donald Trump for years. And these companies live and die on their ability to recruit and retain top talent. Thats a large part of what drives them to make these decisions.
On the other hand, Roose says, it is also very much a personal decision for the two men: I think that, presented with something like a mob at the Capitol, I think they saw a very clear kind of fork in the road for them. Do they want to be the kind of company, the kind of executive who allows this to happen on their platforms, or do they not want to be? Ultimately, I think that in some cases it comes down to a judgment call about what you want to tell your kids and grandkids.
The debate over who gets credit for deplatforming the president of the United States wont get settled anytime soon if ever since it requires access to the inside of Dorseys and Zuckerbergs brains. But theres a larger, more important point here: The reason the answer matters is that the companies Dorsey and Zuckerberg own and run have enormous impact on our lives. And theres no reasonable expectation that anyone outside their companies will have any meaningful impact on how they run them.
That was the point Roose made in his most recent Times column, and the main throughline of our conversation, which you can hear below or on the podcast platform of your choice.
The aftermath of the Capitol riot gave us plenty of other ideas to talk about as well. So on this one, youll also find us discussing why Roose thinks Trumps forced departure from social media is a one-off event, not a slippery slope; why YouTube has a major-but-mostly-unexamined role in creating the environment that got us to last weeks debacle; and why Reddit, surprisingly, could provide a model for a less toxic or at least less dangerous form of social media.
I wish I could tell you that I leavened this weeks episode with something fun and light, but that would be false advertising: After talking to Roose, I also talked to NBC News reporter Ben Collins, who had already warned us about the enormous dangers of the QAnon cult last fall. But since QAnon was a major driver in the Capitol riot (see, among many others: Ashli Babbitt, the woman shot and killed by a police officer while storming the building), I had Collins back to explain the way QAnon has shape-shifted from a fantastical conspiracy theory about child sex slavery to a fantastical conspiracy theory about election fraud and Trumps dangerous attempt to harness it.
The only good news available here: At least many more of us are paying attention to this global information pandemic.
Support Vox’s explanatory journalism
Every day at Vox, we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you, and our audience around the world, with information that empowers you through understanding. Voxs work is reaching more people than ever, but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles, videos, and podcasts to all who need them. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today, from as little as $3.
