Twitter had a reason for its decision — but that doesn’t mean it was a good one
Of course, none of the above really explains why Twitter would ban Blackburn’s ad. The service decided to block the ad, according to the
Associated Press, because the comment about “baby body parts” was “deemed an inflammatory statement that is likely to evoke a strong negative reaction.” That’s hard to argue with. But Twitter has been repeatedly criticized for failing to ban abusive and threatening users. Last year,
Leslie Jones received an onslaught of racist and abusive tweets, and while the service has
made changes, any regular user knows that racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic insults are disturbingly common.
So why block Blackburn’s ad? The explanation, according to Twitter, is that the service has different rules for paid ads than for ordinary user tweets. “Twitter provides a platform for its users to share and receive a wide range of ideas and content, and we greatly value and defend our users' ability to express themselves,” the company’s
advertising policy reads. But because of Twitter’s targeting options, “advertisers on Twitter have the power to reach an audience beyond the users who choose to follow their account." With greater power comes greater responsibility — Twitter requires advertisers to adhere to stricter standards than users, and reserves the right to
ban ads that include “inflammatory or provocative content which is likely to evoke a strong negative reaction.”
A spokesperson for Twitter confirmed to Vox that while the promoted tweets containing Blackburn’s ad were banned, Blackburn was still allowed to
tweet the ad from her ordinary user account.
