/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

[Thread] Twitter will stop accepting all political and issue ads on its platform globally starting on November 22

but not the sense that will get them banned. https://onezero.medium.com/... https://twitter.com/... @jack : Internet political ads present entirely new challenges to civic discourse: machine learning-based optimization of messaging and micro-targeting, unchecked misleading information, and deep fakes. All at increasing velocity, sophistication, and overwhelming scale. @jack : A political message earns reach when people decide to follow an account or retweet. Paying for reach removes that decision, forcing highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. We believe this decision should not be compromised by money. Will Oremus / @willoremus : The problem with banning political advertising is that almost everything is political. I wrote about how Twitter's widely applauded new policy could backfire: https://onezero.medium.com/... @jack : We'll share the final policy by 11/15, including a few exceptions (ads in support of voter registration will still be allowed, for instance). We'll start enforcing our new policy on 11/22 to provide current advertisers a notice period before this change goes into effect. Jessica Alter / @jalter : PSA: This is a bad decision and it won't have the impacts than anyone is talking about... Thread 👇 https://twitter.com/... Ned Segal / @nedsegal : Since we are getting questions: This decision was based on principle, not money. As context, we've disclosed that political ad spend for the 2018 US midterms was <$3M. There is no change to our Q4 guidance. I am proud to work @twitter! #LoveWhereYouWork https://twitter.com/... David Kaye / @davidakaye : strong recommend. if this policy ends up in effect privileging high-follower count politicians over new entries and marginalized voices, it's not really a ‘win for democracy’ is it https://twitter.com/... Hillary Clinton / @hillaryclinton : This is the right thing to do for democracy in America and all over the world. What say you, @Facebook? https://twitter.com/... Mcc / @mcclure111 : Reading Jack's summary of the policy and it sounds to me like it will be legal for Shell to purchase ads but illegal to purchase ads talking about how Shell is causing global warming, because that's “political” or an “issue ad”? Uhhhhh https://twitter.com/... Mcc / @mcclure111 : So here's Twitter's “Legal, Policy and Trust & Safety Lead” with the incredibly alarming details pic.twitter.com/EQ3Q3Chypi @om : I would argue that all media should avoid political advertising all together. Google should follow Twitter. If we can not reform campaign finance, why not just make it difficult to use that cash. Just a thought. https://twitter.com/... @jack : In addition, we need more forward-looking political ad regulation (very difficult to do). Ad transparency requirements are progress, but not enough. The internet provides entirely new capabilities, and regulators need to think past the present day to ensure a level playing field. Charlotte Jee / @charlottejee : Mad how impressed people are with @jack for shooting into the biggest open goal ever. I guess that's why he did it. A very effective, and not very costly, PR boost. The devil, as ever, will be in the details. Mark Zuckerberg being bad does not make Jack Dorsey good. @jack : While internet advertising is incredibly powerful and very effective for commercial advertisers, that power brings significant risks to politics, where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions. Fabio Chiusi / @fabiochiusi : “Twitter was not the first platform to ban political ads. It was preceded by LinkedIn, Pinterest, and TikTok, among others” https://www.getrevue.co/... Steve Kovach / @stevekovach : What I find interesting — Dorsey is willing to over correct now until a better solution on political ads problem presents itself. And it'll happen with minimal impact to business. Plus, people can still tweet whatever they want. https://twitter.com/... Nicholas Thompson / @nxthompson : Can I raise my hand and suggest that both Twitter and FB are wrong and that the best solution is to allow political ads but to stop manifestly false ones? 🤷‍♂️🤷 ‍♂️ https://www.wired.com/... @jack : These challenges will affect ALL internet communication, not just political ads. Best to focus our efforts on the root problems, without the additional burden and complexity taking money brings. Trying to fix both means fixing neither well, and harms our credibility. @manvsgame : Good on Twitter for banning all political advertisements starting this November. https://www.theverge.com/... On that note, I'd like to see @Twitch stop putting political streams in the “Recommended Channels” section. https://twitter.com/... Ben Thompson / @benthompson : Precisely backwards. If there is no money at stake then there is no proof this is about principles. It's a Strategy Credit. https://stratechery.com/... https://twitter.com/... @jack : We're well aware we're a small part of a much larger political advertising ecosystem. Some might argue our actions today could favor incumbents. But we have witnessed many social movements reach massive scale without any political advertising. I trust this will only grow. Kurt Wagner / @kurtwagner8 : Also, basically no financial downside for Twitter on this. On their earnings call last week CFO Ned Segal said ad revenue from political ads around the 2018 midterms was “ less than $3 million for us.” so yeah, this won't really impact their business at all Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : Ah yes. Immaterial for Twitter... https://twitter.com/... Edward Snowden / @snowden : Wow. Big move by @jack, and a bigger contrast to @Facebook's increasingly problematic policy positions. https://twitter.com/... See also Mediagazer

@jack

Context & Ripple Effects

Jack Dorsey's thread reframes paid political reach as the core problem: a message that earns retweets has passed through people's judgment, while paid targeting forces optimized political messaging on users who never chose it — with machine-learning optimization, unchecked misinformation, and deep fakes cited as the accelerants. The ban takes effect globally on November 22, with a final policy due November 15 and voter-registration ads kept as an explicit exception.

The move lands in an open argument about platform responsibility: Vox framed it within hours as direct pressure on Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg to follow suit, and Slate's follow-up pushes past bans entirely toward requiring every advertiser to reveal ad provenance and stand behind their claims.

First-order effects

  • Political and issue advertisers lose Twitter as a paid channel worldwide from November 22, keeping only voter-registration promotion and whatever survives the November 15 final policy.
  • Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg face immediate public pressure to match the ban or defend why paid political targeting should stay on their platform.

Second-order effects

  • Campaign and issue-ad budgets concentrate on the platforms that still accept paid political targeting, raising Facebook's share of the market Twitter just exited and sharpening the contrast between the two companies' positions.
  • Twitter's own carve-outs — voter-registration ads now, and the later allowance of limited-targeting cause-based ads from verified sources — show the company already negotiating where its bright-line ban bends under advocacy-group and news-org demand.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds, the industry splits between platforms that refuse paid political reach outright and those that keep it under disclosure rules — with Slate's provenance-and-accountability standard emerging as the likely regulatory template either way, since it applies to all advertising rather than one category.
  • A durable norm takes shape that organic distribution is the legitimate path for political persuasion, pushing future fights over election influence away from ad products and toward recommendation algorithms and organic amplification.

The trend: Social platforms are diverging on whether paid political reach is a sellable product or an unmanageable liability, with ad-provenance transparency becoming the compromise both camps are converging toward.

Discussion

  • @jack @jack on x
    A final note. This isn't about free expression. This is about paying for reach. And paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today's democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle. It's worth stepping back in order to address.
  • @jack @jack on x
    For instance, it's not credible for us to say: “We're working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, buuut if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad...well...they can say whatever they want! 😉”
  • @aoc Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on x
    This is a good call. Technology - and social media especially - has a powerful responsibility in preserving the integrity of our elections. Not allowing for paid disinformation is one of the most basic, ethical decisions a company can make. /1 https://twitter.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    We considered stopping only candidate ads, but issue ads present a way to circumvent. Additionally, it isn't fair for everyone but candidates to buy ads for issues they want to push. So we're stopping these too.
  • @willoremus Will Oremus on x
    Ads about climate change are political, Twitter says. But what about ads by oil companies, car companies, and steakhouses? They're political too, in a sense—but not the sense that will get them banned. https://onezero.medium.com/... https://twitter.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    Internet political ads present entirely new challenges to civic discourse: machine learning-based optimization of messaging and micro-targeting, unchecked misleading information, and deep fakes. All at increasing velocity, sophistication, and overwhelming scale.
  • @jack @jack on x
    A political message earns reach when people decide to follow an account or retweet. Paying for reach removes that decision, forcing highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. We believe this decision should not be compromised by money.
  • @willoremus Will Oremus on x
    The problem with banning political advertising is that almost everything is political. I wrote about how Twitter's widely applauded new policy could backfire: https://onezero.medium.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    We'll share the final policy by 11/15, including a few exceptions (ads in support of voter registration will still be allowed, for instance). We'll start enforcing our new policy on 11/22 to provide current advertisers a notice period before this change goes into effect.
  • @jalter Jessica Alter on x
    PSA: This is a bad decision and it won't have the impacts than anyone is talking about... Thread 👇 https://twitter.com/...
  • @nedsegal Ned Segal on x
    Since we are getting questions: This decision was based on principle, not money. As context, we've disclosed that political ad spend for the 2018 US midterms was <$3M. There is no change to our Q4 guidance. I am proud to work @twitter! #LoveWhereYouWork https://twitter.com/...
  • @davidakaye David Kaye on x
    strong recommend. if this policy ends up in effect privileging high-follower count politicians over new entries and marginalized voices, it's not really a ‘win for democracy’ is it https://twitter.com/...
  • @hillaryclinton Hillary Clinton on x
    This is the right thing to do for democracy in America and all over the world. What say you, @Facebook? https://twitter.com/...
  • @mcclure111 Mcc on x
    Reading Jack's summary of the policy and it sounds to me like it will be legal for Shell to purchase ads but illegal to purchase ads talking about how Shell is causing global warming, because that's “political” or an “issue ad”? Uhhhhh https://twitter.com/...
  • @mcclure111 Mcc on x
    So here's Twitter's “Legal, Policy and Trust & Safety Lead” with the incredibly alarming details pic.twitter.com/EQ3Q3Chypi
  • @om @om on x
    I would argue that all media should avoid political advertising all together. Google should follow Twitter. If we can not reform campaign finance, why not just make it difficult to use that cash. Just a thought. https://twitter.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    In addition, we need more forward-looking political ad regulation (very difficult to do). Ad transparency requirements are progress, but not enough. The internet provides entirely new capabilities, and regulators need to think past the present day to ensure a level playing field.
  • @charlottejee Charlotte Jee on x
    Mad how impressed people are with @jack for shooting into the biggest open goal ever. I guess that's why he did it. A very effective, and not very costly, PR boost. The devil, as ever, will be in the details. Mark Zuckerberg being bad does not make Jack Dorsey good.
  • @jack @jack on x
    While internet advertising is incredibly powerful and very effective for commercial advertisers, that power brings significant risks to politics, where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions.
  • @fabiochiusi Fabio Chiusi on x
    “Twitter was not the first platform to ban political ads. It was preceded by LinkedIn, Pinterest, and TikTok, among others” https://www.getrevue.co/...
  • @stevekovach Steve Kovach on x
    What I find interesting — Dorsey is willing to over correct now until a better solution on political ads problem presents itself. And it'll happen with minimal impact to business. Plus, people can still tweet whatever they want. https://twitter.com/...
  • @nxthompson Nicholas Thompson on x
    Can I raise my hand and suggest that both Twitter and FB are wrong and that the best solution is to allow political ads but to stop manifestly false ones? 🤷‍♂️🤷 ‍♂️ https://www.wired.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    These challenges will affect ALL internet communication, not just political ads. Best to focus our efforts on the root problems, without the additional burden and complexity taking money brings. Trying to fix both means fixing neither well, and harms our credibility.
  • @manvsgame @manvsgame on x
    Good on Twitter for banning all political advertisements starting this November. https://www.theverge.com/... On that note, I'd like to see @Twitch stop putting political streams in the “Recommended Channels” section. https://twitter.com/...
  • @benthompson Ben Thompson on x
    Precisely backwards. If there is no money at stake then there is no proof this is about principles. It's a Strategy Credit. https://stratechery.com/... https://twitter.com/...
  • @jack @jack on x
    We're well aware we're a small part of a much larger political advertising ecosystem. Some might argue our actions today could favor incumbents. But we have witnessed many social movements reach massive scale without any political advertising. I trust this will only grow.
  • @kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
    Also, basically no financial downside for Twitter on this. On their earnings call last week CFO Ned Segal said ad revenue from political ads around the 2018 midterms was “ less than $3 million for us.” so yeah, this won't really impact their business at all
  • @benedictevans Benedict Evans on x
    Ah yes. Immaterial for Twitter... https://twitter.com/...
  • @snowden Edward Snowden on x
    Wow. Big move by @jack, and a bigger contrast to @Facebook's increasingly problematic policy positions. https://twitter.com/...