Donald Trump’s North Korea “war” tweets are in the public interest, says Twitter, and won’t be removed
They may have caused a secretive nation with potential nuclear weapons to think there had been a declaration of war, but comments made by Donald Trump about North Korea will remain on Twitter.
The tech company has defended the President’s provocative tweets as being in the public interest, despite North Korea’s foreign minister calling them tantamount to a declaration of war.
“Some of you have been asking why we haven’t taken down the tweet mentioned here,” the company said in a post from its public policy Twitter account, which was later retweeted by founder and chief executive Jack Dorsey.
We’re putting significant effort into increasing our transparency as a company, and commit to meaningful and fast progress. Will do better. https://t.co/g1Rvkaj2sl— jack (@jack) September 25, 2017
“We hold all accounts to the same rules, and consider a number of factors when assessing whether tweets violate our rules. Among the considerations is ‘newsworthiness’ and whether a Tweet is of public interest.
“This has long been internal policy and we’ll soon update our public-facing rules to reflect it. We need to do better on this, and will. Twitter is committed to transparency and keeping people informed about what’s happening in the world.
“We’ll continue to be guided by these fundamental principles.”
It’s of course not the first time Trump has used Twitter to air his views. But the latest development has rattled global markets and North Korea has also promised to shoot down US bombers flying near the country.
Could the world go to war over a tweet?
It’s 2017, of course
Don’t be ridiculous
Vote
[See results]
Although Twitter provides a mouthpiece for the President, Trump has caused the company more hassle than provided any benefit. It hasn’t seen any uplift in revenue from the high-profile attention around the globe, but has faced a headache in defending the newsworthiness of Trump tweets that many deem offensive. It’s just the latest example in a wider debate over free speech and censorship on tech platforms.