This is directly contrary to the reporting in Twitter Files by Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger whose journalistic integrity and credentials exceed yours and mine combined by orders of magnitude:
"On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:
- create justifications to ban Trump
- seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders
- express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban"
https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16017204550055116...
And the only doxxing related to LibsOfTikTok was Taylor Lorenz doxxing LibsOfTikTok, to the point that Lorenz showed up at LibsOfTikTok's house in person herself. She didn't just doxx her, she went to her house in person. There are pictures.
And I’m saying this as someone who thinks the decision to publish LOTT’s real name was borderline, despite the fact that LOTT decided to use her real name for her domain registration.
(Besides the fact that Elon literally doxxed his former employee trying to insinuate he is a pedo)
You conveniently misinterpreted or even left our crucial pieces of the so called “twitter files” including that the policies of shadow banning and such were already mentioned and known.
Some of the employees were literally asking for reasons to KEEP certain right wing accounts on twitter.
They listened to violations of revenge porn AND TOS violations of Hunter Biden’s dick. The right wing really seems obsessed with seeing it because the links that were all mentioned in the docs were all of his dick LOL
LibsofTikTok causing harassment to children’s hospitals and they still weren’t even banned. No they weren’t promoted in the algorithm but there’s no right to be amplified.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/02/lgbtq-t...
They were "known" in the same sense that everybody already "knew" that the US government spies on us before Snowden leaked the details.
Twitter claimed that they didn't shadowban - in fact there's a tweet out there somewhere (I think I saw it shared in one of the Twitter Files threads itself) in which Jack Dorsey himself explicitly denies that Twitter shadowbans. To claim that the Files didn't reveal any new information is utterly disingenuous.
Interesting how you moved on from “government involvement” when everyone realizes Biden campaign wasn’t the government and it was dick picks they were trying to remove.
Shadowban was literally talked about earlier this year. https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/5/23012046/twitter-prisoner-...
Is the claim that Twitter changed their ToS in order to justify banning Trump? If so, can you share the before and after texts? I assume the Internet Archive would have snapshots.
Or is the point, literally, that people at Twitter discussed whether a change of policy was a good idea in the context of the Jan 6 insurrection? In which case, like...wouldn't you sort of expect them to have conversations about the fitness of the ToS to an unprecedented situation? That sounds like doing their jobs competently, no?
> - create justifications to ban Trump
> - seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders
> - express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban"
Funnily enough this is literally exactly what Musk has done in the last 24 hours with regard to the @ElonJet account and the people reporting on it.