{"id":22106,"date":"2018-04-20T10:20:03","date_gmt":"2018-04-20T14:20:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.kaspersky.com\/blog\/?p=22106"},"modified":"2018-10-31T09:45:09","modified_gmt":"2018-10-31T13:45:09","slug":"ek-on-twitter-ads","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.kaspersky.com\/blog\/ek-on-twitter-ads\/22106\/","title":{"rendered":"An open letter to the management of Twitter."},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cWhen you tear out a man\u2019s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you\u2019re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Dorsey and the rest of the senior management of Twitter,<\/p>\n

I see that of late you\u2019ve been having concerns<\/a> about the \u2018health\u2019 of your social media platform, and how it can be used maliciously for spreading disinformation, creating social discord, and so on. As a long-time advocate of a safe and friendly internet, I share these concerns! Though I thought my company stood on the periphery of this social media storm, it turns out I was quite mistaken.<\/p>\n

If this is a mistake please openly admit this. This would quash any doubts about potential political censorship on Twitter.<\/div>\n

At the end of January of this year, Twitter unexpectedly informed us about an advertising ban on our official accounts<\/a> where we announce new posts on our various blogs on cybersecurity (including, for example, Securelist<\/a> and Kaspersky Daily<\/a>) and inform users about new cyberthreats and what to do about them. In a short letter from an unnamed Twitter employee, we were told that our company \u201coperates using a business model that inherently conflicts with acceptable Twitter Ads business practices.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cOUR DETERMINATION THAT KASPERSKY LAB OPERATES USING A BUSINESS MODEL THAT INHERENTLY CONFLICTS WITH ACCEPTABLE TWITTER ADS BUSINESS PRACTICES\u201d<\/p>\n

Huh? I read this formulation again and again but still couldn\u2019t for the life of me understand how it might relate to us. One thing I can say for sure is this: we haven\u2019t violated any written \u2013 or unwritten \u2013 rules, and our business model is quite simply the same template business model that\u2019s used throughout the whole cybersecurity industry: We provide users with products and services, and they pay us for them. What specific (or even non-specific) rules, standards and\/or business practices we violated are not stated in the letter. In my view, the ban itself contradicts Twitter\u2019s declared-as-adopted principle of freedom of expression<\/em>. I\u2019ll return to that point in a minute, but first let\u2019s look at the others:<\/p>\n

\u201cWE ALSO WANT TO ENSURE PEOPLE FEEL SAFE WHEN THEY INTERACT WITH OUR SITE\u201d<\/p>\n

Saving the world from cyberthreats is our mission, so it\u2019s fair to assume that the cybersafety is the focus of the majority of the content we have promoted on Twitter. That\u2019s actually true \u2013 and, being a transparent business, we\u2019re ready to share the overall figures regarding our advertising on Twitter in 2017:<\/p>\n