yesEmily DreyfussNone
×

Get access to Protocol

Will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
People

Jack Dorsey lost control of Twitter a long time ago

Reports that an activist investor is agitating for the Twitter CEO's removal follow Dorsey's years-long mea culpa tour.

Jack Dorsey, chief executive officer of Twitter Inc. and Square Inc., speaks with members of the media following an Empowering Entrepreneurs event at Ryerson University in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, on Tuesday, April 2, 2019. Dorsey said he hopes the companies he co-founded won't be tethered to their headquarters in San Francisco. Photographer: Cole Burston/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Jack Dorsey has spent the last two years apologizing for his platform, but what it may come down to for him is money.

Photo: Cole Burston/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The biggest problem with Jack Dorsey's apology tour, which began in 2018, was that it had no end. The Twitter CEO was sorry for the Nazis, sorry for the ways the platform was gamed in the 2016 election, sorry for all the harassment, the disinformation, the bots. Sorry that threading tweets didn't always work. In interviews for the tour, he often said he was sorry for what the like button incentivized, for the bad behavior the site seemed to subtly encourage.

It was obvious he was most sorry that there were no easy answers. Despite some successful design changes over the last year — which emphasized conversation and de-emphasized things like follower count — and some promising safety changes, Twitter remains an incredibly difficult product to moderate and monetize. The Nazis remain. The bots remain. Profits remain small. Dorsey remains sorry.

Get what matters in tech, in your inbox every morning. Sign up for Source Code.

When news broke on Friday that conservative activist investor Paul Singer and his firm Elliott Management are trying to force Dorsey out of the company, it felt like a potentially natural end to the tour. A final thing Dorsey could be sorry for: losing control of the company he co-founded and had arguably lost control of long ago.

And after all the apologizing and pledging to make Twitter a better healthier place, what it may end up all coming to for Dorsey is money.

It's unclear what Singer wants in the long-term for the company, though one can assume profits are top of mind. The management fund was not immediately available for comment. Sources told Bloomberg and CNBC that the investor, which has taken a large stake in the company, is focusing on jockeying for enough board seats to vote out Dorsey, who has faced criticism for spreading himself too thin running two companies. If it happens, it'll emphasize just how little control Dorsey actually had over Twitter, which he co-founded in 2006. Unlike Mark Zuckerberg's situation at Facebook, the stock structure at Twitter is such that Dorsey never has had full voting control of the company.

Twitter isn't and probably never will be a tech giant that makes money like Facebook. (Anyone who calls them rivals is confused.) But as observers have occasionally noted over the last few years, it's endured problems like abuse and attacks from politicians and managed to become a profitable company. And if activist investors are looking for anything, it's probably for a chief executive who can turn what's been a stumbling trend upward into something a little more stable.

Take the last two quarters. In October, the company's stock plummeted following weaker than expected earnings caused by slow sales and advertising bugs. In January, the company reported strong growth in monetizable users, but its earnings missed analyst expectations. Yes, profits! But always with qualifiers.

The stock was up more than 7% in after-hours trading on Friday after the news that Singer wants to remove Dorsey.

Twitter's loudest critics have traditionally also been some of its most devoted users: people who love and rely on the platform for work, for information, for friendship. These are the folks Dorsey has been attempting to appease on his tour, the people who just want to use the site without being harassed, without encountering harmful lies, without being erroneously blocked.

Whether those desires are on Singer's agenda remains to be seen. Platform abuse may be the furthest thing from Singer's concern. Singer, who has taken an activist role in many big companies, is a devoted supporter of President Trump (arguably Twitter's most devoted fan, or at least its biggest beneficiary).

But the two problems Twitter faces — platform abuse and slow growth — are not completely unrelated. When advertising depends on the health and widespread adoption of the platform, the two issues are tied up together.

Another vocal shareholder who's pushed for Dorsey's removal, Scott Galloway, made this point in December in an open letter to the company's board after Dorsey announced he would relocate to Africa for six months. "Twitter has, on every metric, underperformed peers for several years," he wrote, pinning the blame squarely on Dorsey. "Fake accounts, GRU-sponsored trolls, algorithms that promote conspiracies and junk science, and inconsistent application of your terms of service have resulted in a firm that not only underperforms, but is dangerous."

Galloway argues that by getting rid of Dorsey, Twitter could fix some of the very serious problems plaguing the health of the platform and also earn more money for its shareholders. He sees Dorsey as the roadblock to innovation that might modernize the platform.

"It's not Mr. Dorsey's plans to move to Africa that constrain stakeholder value, but his plans to move back," he wrote. "Mr. Dorsey demonstrates a lack of self-awareness, indifference, and yogababble that have hamstrung stakeholder value."

That yogababble has infuriated investors and Twitter users alike. But it doesn't appear to be an attempt to wriggle out of anything; it's who Dorsey is. He's idiosyncratic. His quirks are well known — the shaggy facial hair, the silent retreats, the all-black outfits and hats, the insistence on walking to work. He's been criticized for it all.

Get in touch with us: Share information securely with Protocol via encrypted Signal or WhatsApp message, at 415-214-4715 or through our anonymous SecureDrop.

Over the course of his apology tour, the "anti-CEO," as he's been called despite being literally at the helm of two massive companies simultaneously, has appeared genuinely pained. Many observers would not have been surprised if Dorsey had quit in the past few years. When he announced his temporary Africa relocation, it felt like a possible soft exit. Now, his exit may come against his will.

And much as he has pledged to fix Twitter, it's not hard to imagine leaving coming as some relief.

Power

Don't sacrifice security for performance when computing at the edge

Companies must look at security in tandem with networking.

Federal IT managers and security analysts need to weigh the risk and reward of each upgrade or improvement to minimize new risk, writes Jim Richberg.

Image: Florian Olivo/Unsplash

Jim Richberg is the Public Sector Field CISO at Fortinet.

As federal agencies increasingly push for improved performance and agility through their networks and devices, they must also consider the lack of visibility that comes with deploying cutting-edge technology. Centralized visibility and unified controls are sometimes being sacrificed in favor of performance and agility through smart devices collecting and processing data at the edge.

Keep Reading Show less
Sponsored Content

The future of computing at the edge: an interview with Intel’s Tom Lantzsch

An interview with Tom Lantzsch, SVP and GM, Internet of Things Group at Intel

An interview with Tom Lantzsch

Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Internet of Things Group (IoT) at Intel Corporation

Edge computing had been on the rise in the last 18 months – and accelerated amid the need for new applications to solve challenges created by the Covid-19 pandemic. Tom Lantzsch, Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Internet of Things Group (IoT) at Intel Corp., thinks there are more innovations to come – and wants technology leaders to think equally about data and the algorithms as critical differentiators.

In his role at Intel, Lantzsch leads the worldwide group of solutions architects across IoT market segments, including retail, banking, hospitality, education, industrial, transportation, smart cities and healthcare. And he's seen first-hand how artificial intelligence run at the edge can have a big impact on customers' success.

Protocol sat down with Lantzsch to talk about the challenges faced by companies seeking to move from the cloud to the edge; some of the surprising ways that Intel has found to help customers and the next big breakthrough in this space.

What are the biggest trends you are seeing with edge computing and IoT?

A few years ago, there was a notion that the edge was going to be a simplistic model, where we were going to have everything connected up into the cloud and all the compute was going to happen in the cloud. At Intel, we had a bit of a contrarian view. We thought much of the interesting compute was going to happen closer to where data was created. And we believed, at that time, that camera technology was going to be the driving force – that just the sheer amount of content that was created would be overwhelming to ship to the cloud – so we'd have to do compute at the edge. A few years later – that hypothesis is in action and we're seeing edge compute happen in a big way.

Keep Reading Show less
Saul Hudson
Saul Hudson has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, especially in understanding and targeting messages in cutting-edge technologies. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, in helping companies to build passionate audiences and accelerate their growth. Hudson has reported from more than 30 countries, from war zones to boardrooms to presidential palaces. He has led multinational, multi-lingual teams and managed operations for hundreds of journalists. Hudson is a Managing Partner at Angle42, a strategic communications consultancy.
Politics

Far-right misinformation: Facebook's most engaging news

A new study shows that before and after the election, far-right misinformation pages drew more engagement than all other partisan news.

A new study finds that far right misinformation pulls in more engagement on Facebook than other types of partisan news.

Photo: Brett Jordan/Unsplash

In the months before and after the 2020 election, far-right pages that are known to spread misinformation consistently garnered more engagement on Facebook than any other partisan news, according to a New York University study published Wednesday.

The study looked at Facebook engagement for news sources across the political spectrum between Aug. 10, 2020 and Jan. 11, 2021, and found that on average, far-right pages that regularly trade in misinformation raked in 65% more engagement per follower than other far-right pages that aren't known for spreading misinformation.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky
Issie Lapowsky (@issielapowsky) is a senior reporter at Protocol, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University’s Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing. Email Issie.
Transforming 2021

Blockchain, QR codes and your phone: the race to build vaccine passports

Digital verification systems could give people the freedom to work and travel. Here's how they could actually happen.

One day, you might not need to carry that physical passport around, either.

Photo: CommonPass

There will come a time, hopefully in the near future, when you'll feel comfortable getting on a plane again. You might even stop at the lounge at the airport, head to the regional office when you land and maybe even see a concert that evening. This seemingly distant reality will depend upon vaccine rollouts continuing on schedule, an open-sourced digital verification system and, amazingly, the blockchain.

Several countries around the world have begun to prepare for what comes after vaccinations. Swaths of the population will be vaccinated before others, but that hasn't stopped industries decimated by the pandemic from pioneering ways to get some people back to work and play. One of the most promising efforts is the idea of a "vaccine passport," which would allow individuals to show proof that they've been vaccinated against COVID-19 in a way that could be verified by businesses to allow them to travel, work or relax in public without a great fear of spreading the virus.

Keep Reading Show less
Mike Murphy

Mike Murphy ( @mcwm) is the director of special projects at Protocol, focusing on the industries being rapidly upended by technology and the companies disrupting incumbents. Previously, Mike was the technology editor at Quartz, where he frequently wrote on robotics, artificial intelligence, and consumer electronics.

People

WhatsApp thinks business chat is the future — but it won't be easy

From privacy policy screw-ups to UI questions, can WhatsApp crack the super-app riddle?

WhatsApp Business is trying to wrap shopping around messaging. It's not always easy.

Image: WhatsApp

At some point, WhatsApp was always going to have to make some money. Facebook paid $21.8 billion for the company in 2014, and since then, WhatsApp has grown to more than 2 billion users in more than 180 countries. And while, yes, Facebook's acquisition was in part simply a way to neutralize a competitor, it also knows how to monetize an audience.

The trick, though, would be figuring out how to do that without putting ads into the app. Nobody at WhatsApp ever wanted to do that, including co-founders Jan Koum and Brian Acton, who reportedly left Facebook after disagreements over ads. More recently, even Mark Zuckerberg has slowed the WhatsApp ad train, with The Information reporting that ads in WhatsApp likely won't come while the company's under so much regulatory scrutiny. So: $21.8 billion, no ads. What to do?

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editor at large. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Latest Stories