This might be misleading. If old Twitter was preemptively taking down posts that certain American or European organizations wanted taken down, this wouldn't show in the transparency reports at all. If you used the platform before and now, it's very obvious that that was the case.

>If you used the platform before and now, it's very obvious that that was the case.

Does this mean that the source for this information is "dude, trust me"?

And the thousands of documents that the Democrats, their administration, and US intelligence deemed "nothingburger" until they even became annoyed at repeating it over and over again nonsensically. What's the Brazilian government's term for "nothingburger?" Are they using the same terms that fascist Brazil (aided by successive Democratic administrations and US intelligence) used about disappearances and torture?

That's a lot of words and yet I'm not any closer to the source of this information.

In the context here, a takedown request would be preferred. It would indicate the judge being willing to accept a takedown in lieu of putting the poster in prison.

Having hate speech laws doesn't equate to the state giving takedown notices. More likely the individual will be prosecuted as has happened in the past few weeks of social unrest.

But that is my argument! In UK takedown notices are given by some non-profit organization (not state), or are covered by TOS violation. But it is just censorship!

> in the past few weeks of social unrest.

Compare how social media handled recent UK protests, and "summer of love" riots in 2020!

> and number of people imprisoned or punished is far greater than Russia or other countries.

Clearly not according to their source. Do you have any data to back up your claim?

> In 2022, over 21,000 individuals in Russia were penalized for such “offences”, with 2,307 given administrative detention and the rest heavy fines

> in year ending March 2022, there were 155,841 hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/07/russia-20000-...

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-...

You’re comparing people penalized with number of recorded instances. Those are two wildly different statistics.

One figure refers to recorded "crimes", the other to actual imprisonments.

Do you understand that the two are simply not comparable, and that there's obviously no analogy here? Even the alleged offenses aren't even comparable.

This isn't just one extremely basic logical fallacy you're making, but two.

> UK has hate speech laws, and number of people imprisoned or punished is far greater than Russia or other countries.

I call counter-bullshit. Provide some source with numbers.

The UK went off the cliff around when Musk took over Twitter so it's not surprising they're not on the last report before then.

Didn’t they just move that stuff here?

https://x.com/globalaffairs/status/1824819053061669244?s=46&...

Do they post aggregate stats about takedowns there? It seems like they just post ad-hoc information, which leaves a lot of room for editorialization. For example going into great detail about the Brazil situation, while on the other hand posting this extremely vague statement in response to Pakistan blocking X and then never following up with any further context about what's going on there.

https://x.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1780676243538452680

Have they ramped up censorship in Pakistan to appease the government? Who knows, they're not telling.

The Brazilian courts specifically asks that the takedowns must be done in secret. I believe we can assume they are not being accounted for in these statistics.