Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday called his company’s blocking of posts by those who tried to share the New York Post’s story earlier in the day about Hunter Biden’s emails referencing his then-vice president father Joe Biden and a Ukrainian natural gas company as “not great.”
“Our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great,” Dorsey posted to his personal Twitter account. “And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM (direct message) with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable.”
The admission comes after Twitter blocked users from using the URL of the New York Post story in posts and locking the accounts of those that did.
Facebook took a similar stance, “reducing its distribution on the platform.”
The Post story said it uncovered emails that indicate Hunter Biden introduced his father, the Democrat nominee for president, to Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Ukrainian energy concern Burisma Holdings.
Joe Biden has said he has “never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.” The meeting between Pozharskyi and Joe Biden reportedly came a year before the then-vice president famously admitted pressuring the Ukrainian government to fire a prosecutor investigating Burisma.
Dorsey’s post came two hours after the company’s “Twitter Safety” account claimed the reason for blocking the distribution of the New York Post’s story was because: “The images contained in the articles include personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules.”
However, that differed from its initial explanation – stated to National Review – that the material included in the story violated its “hacked materials policy.”
However, the National Review notes, Twitter does allow leaked and hacked information from other websites, such as WikiLeaks, to be shared.
In its multi-post explanation Wednesday evening, Twitter repeated the “hacking policy” was a reason for blocking the distribution of the story.
“We know we have more work to do to provide clarity in our product when we enforce our rules in this manner,” it said. “We should provide additional clarity and context when preventing the Tweeting or DMing of URLs that violate our policies.”