OK -- to play nice, let's say it's a tuning problem.
Why didn't this 'tuning problem' get fixed the first few times politically motivated messages got 'disappeared'?
At what point does the responsibility lie on those massaging the tuning methods?
my personal view is that social media is heavily gamed by the three-letter-agencies and all of their equivalents abroad. The existence of internal 'squads' within most of these groups that focus on social media networks reinforces that personal view -- if it wasn't an important battle ground then why form squadrons to seize and control it?
I don't think anyone expects Twitter or other social media companies to get this perfect. The nature of the problem means there will always be edge cases, debatable calls, and algorithms automatically doing unfortunate things. I do think there is a reasonable expectation for these companies to both do more and make progress.
That's exactly what nearly everyone expects, for exactly their own individual definition of perfect.
This is the result of letting cooperations own communication channels, something we were escaping until smartphone apps became popular.
Normally, consensus reporting is a good sign that something is undesirable. In this case it has clearly been weaponized. This is a TUNING problem and it seems like social media companies have to find a way to balance on this