Jack Dorsey Tried to Be Cool, But the Company He Built Is Deeply Conventional

Twitter’s CEO steps down, leaving a platform presenting the same problems as its peers.

Victor Boyko/Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Jack Dorsey always looked like a person who was trying to affect something else. He was the CEO of two big Silicon Valley tech companies—Square and Twitter—and is, as of today, just the CEO of one after leaving the latter. But he tried to present himself as something else. A “cool CEO,” maybe.

Instead of button-down business casual, Dorsey wore drapey, oversized, Yeezy-brand-esque black T-shirts. Instead of zip-up vests, he wore jackets from avant-garde designer Rick Owens. He once watched an Owens show at Paris Fashion week from the front row. He struck up some sort of relationship with his collaborator Kanye West. He professed to be a fan of the contemporary minimalist artist Robert Irwin. He went to a meditation retreat in Myanmar.

Dorsey seemed to cultivate the idiosyncrasies and persona of someone who was just a bit more thoughtful than his stick-to-the-script business-speak competitors in Silicon Valley, as detailed by Ashley Feinberg in a 2019 interview she did with him for HuffPost:

A conversation with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey can be incredibly disorienting. Not because he’s particularly clever or thought-provoking, but because he sounds like he should be. He takes long pauses before he speaks. He furrows his brow, setting you up for a considered response from the man many have called a genius. The words themselves sound like they should probably mean something, too. Dorsey is just hard enough to follow that it’s easy to assume that any confusion is your own fault, and that if you just listen a little more or think a little harder, whatever he’s saying will finally start to make sense.

Most of the time, this self-presentation didn’t make a noticeable difference at Twitter. The platform has perhaps sometimes been a bit ahead of its competitors when it comes to moderating the most toxic content. But its business practices never looked unconventional—like those of a fan of minimalist installation art and cutting-edge goth designers. Nor was it the product of someone more thoughtful than the average tech CEO. Twitter dealt with the same kinds of problems of manipulation, disinformation, and other types of abuses that Facebook and YouTube did. Whatever it may have achieved, it played out on much smaller scale, given its much smaller relative user base. 

It probably won’t be that much different under new CEO Parag Agrawal. While working as the company’s chief technology officer, he had promising things to say about balancing what people can say on the platform in a way that keeps it from becoming a cesspool of toxicity. 

“Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation,” he told the MIT Technology Review in 2020.

But Agrawal, like Dorsey, who so desperately wanted to be different, exists in a system that points every social media company toward roughly the same ends: make as much money by capturing as much of our time as possible. No mainstream platform has figured out how to do that without avoiding all of the problems that come with such a business model. There’s no reason to expect a new Twitter CEO will be any different.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate