It's interesting to see his perspective on it, but I can see how Twitter might want to disallow it for both candidates. It's one thing to help something trend like you would an ad, but you don't see the kind of negative advertisements for companies that you do for candidates.
Honestly I'm most surprised by HRC's campaign not asking to use emojis in their hashtags - that seems exactly like something her campaign would have done.
The cited example in the linked article is the same side - it's a screenshot of the Republican National Convention hashtag.
I suspect it was approved because #RNCinCLE isn't an attack/allegation on someone else. I also believe it was a Twitter-initiated hashtag, not one bought by the RNC.
I similarly suspect the Hillary Campaign would've seen an application to add an emoji to #DumpTrump rejected. Hell, Pepsi probably can't sponsor a #CokeSucks one.
What were they tweeting exactly and why were they messaging people that voted for the product? We have seen founders reach out to people that upvoted on Twitter, thanking them for their support but that's different than what Austen described.
reply