James O’Keefe has released a new video from a Twitter meeting on censorship, which includes Twitter’s Legal, Policy and Trust Lead explaining how Twitter is going to pursue more censorship on a global level and why they chose to permanently ban Trump instead of suspending him, among other things.
In the video we learn that, just like at the New York Times and other liberal companies, the employees are activists and appear to be running the show to some extent. Earlier this month employees wrote a letter to Jack and their leaders demanding that Trump be suspended. In this meeting, one of the questions from employees was why Trump was just given a 12-hour timeout to begin with and not permanently banned. Gadde addresses is this and, as O’Keefe notes in the video, seems almost apologetic that they didn’t just ban Trump outright. She said it was a judgement call just to initially give him a temporary ban, but she could understand why some didn’t agree and came to a different conclusion.
There aren’t any big blockbusters in the video, but here’s a summary of the rest from what Project Veritas got from Gadde, including how they are going to ramp up their global censorship:
Vijaya Gadde, Twitter Legal, Policy and Trust & Safety Lead: “One of the interesting things is a lot of the work that we’ve been doing over the last week is work that we’ve built on in other places around the world, where we’ve seen violence unfold as a result of either misleading information or coded rhetoric.”
Gadde: “We’re going to actually be more aggressive in our enforcement beyond de-amplification.”
Gadde: “A lot of our learnings here [in the United States] have come from other markets. So, in that sense, you know, we do feel like it is – this is our global approach.
Gadde: “We need to be very focused on being able to enforce any of these policies or enforcement decisions we make at scale.”
Gadde: “We decided to escalate our enforcement of the civic integrity policy and use a label that disabled engagements to stop the spread of potentially inflammatory content, which is the content around election interference, election fraud, stealing the election, that type of thing.”
Gadde: “We think that the severity of what’s happening on the ground, coupled with the information that’s contained in these [election fraud] tweets — misleading information about the election being stolen and massive fraud around the election are what is changing our analysis of how we should enforce this [civic integrity] policy. It [election fraud tweets] is a much more severe violation given what we were seeing on the ground.”
I don’t believe any social media platform should be used to encourage violence, but we all know that’s not just what Twitter means when they talk about censorship. We all saw how they blocked stories that could have hurt Joe Biden during the election, using the ‘hacked materials’ excuse. So when they are talking about global censorship and what not, I think it means much more than just preventing violence. Pretty soon you won’t be able to disagree with climate change, abortion, or any other liberal idea they refuse to allow dissent on.
Watch the video for more…