Michael Schellenberger

Rank 39 of 47
|
Score -94
9/3/2025, 3:14:10 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
11. “We should be cognisant of the precedent we are setting here which could trigger more asks of this nature into the future.”

Twitter also agreed to send a letter from CEO Jack Dorsey to the NGOs, promising stronger action in the future.

The “plaintiffs in the UEJF hate
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
10. “—we were planning to confidentially disclose some information sought by the NGOs to them in exchange for them dropping the suit”

The NGOs would not settle, despite Twitter’s efforts to cooperate. And so Twitter caved, offering to censor its platform — for all users — in
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
9. Macron Leads Censorship Effort

The year 2016 marked an inflection point in the state’s crackdown on online speech. Events like Brexit, Trump’s victory, the Arab Spring, and France’s Yellow Vest movement, organized via social media, convinced elites that “information
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
8. CONTEXT: France invented the Censorship Industrial Complex 53 years ago

From royal censors to revolutionary tribunals, Napoleonic decrees to Vichy oppression, France’s history has long been defined by the tug-of-war between censorship and free speech.

France’s 1972 Pleven
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
7. “I am not surprised that they are trying now to go back to court and make some public statement…”

Twitter executives knew the timing of the NGOs’ lawsuit was not coincidental.

“From a public policy standpoint,” wrote Audrey Herblin-Stoop, Twitter’s Public Policy Director
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
151d
6. “They are concerned that we let users Tweet anonymously”

Following a mediation session with the NGOs on November 7, 2020, Colangelo updated her colleagues: “The NGOs articulated their concerns, which, broadly speaking, are (1) they feel we are not actioning hate speech

The statement and accompanying images discuss a legal and public relations strategy regarding a lawsuit against Twitter in France related to hate speech. The content suggests strategic timing and public policy considerations, indicating engagement with public issues.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement reflects a strategic approach to legal challenges, which may prioritize corporate interests over broader societal harm reduction, potentially conflicting with the principle of doing no harm. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The discussion involves confidential legal strategies, which may respect privacy but also suggests a lack of transparency, impacting public trust. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding or empathy, focusing instead on legal and strategic maneuvers. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in personal attacks but rather discusses strategic responses to legal challenges.