Discussion

• @andymstone Andy Stone on x

  While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact checked by Facebook's third-party fact checking partners. In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform.

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  CAUTION ADVISED with this morning's Burisma-Biden E-mail story. For several reasons. https://twitter.com/...

• @jack @jack on x

  Our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great. And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we're blocking: unacceptable. https://twitter.com/...

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  This is related to today's Biden story: A few months ago the fact-respecting portion of the internet was outraged at social media companies allowing Plandemic to go wildly viral, despite stated policies against health misinfo. The video was taken down after millions of views...

• @hawleymo Josh Hawley on x

  .@Facebook I want to know on what grounds you are actively censoring a news report about potentially illegal corruption by the Democrat candidate for president. If you have evidence this is “disinformation,” disclose it immediately. Expect a formal inquiry from my office

• @sohrabahmari Sohrab Ahmari on x

  This is a Big Tech information coup. This is digital civil war. I, an editor at The New York Post, one of the nation's largest papers by circulation, can't post one of our own stories that details corruption by a major-party presidential candidate, Biden. https://twitter.com/...

• @natashabertrand Natasha Bertrand on x

  New: Biden campaign responds to NY Post story. “The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story...moreover, we have reviewed Joe Biden's official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.” …

• @realdonaldtrump Donald J. Trump on x

  So terrible that Facebook and Twitter took down the story of “Smoking Gun” emails related to Sleepy Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in the @NYPost. It is only the beginning for them. There is nothing worse than a corrupt politician. REPEAL SECTION 230!!! https://www.cnbc.com/...

• @alxthomp Alex Thompson on x

  Wow. twitter going even further than FB and is no longer letting ppl tweet the NYPost story. This is what pops up if you try. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...

• @mtracey Michael Tracey on x

  Twitter is now warning that the NY Post story on Hunter Biden is “unsafe.” You don't even have to defend the veracity of the story to recognize how creepy and authoritarian this is https://twitter.com/...

• @thestalwart Joe Weisenthal on x

  I'm ok with Facebook and Twitter throttling some links. Just gotta make sure they always make the right choices.

• @repdougcollins Rep. Doug Collins on x

  .@Facebook's decision to “reduce distribution” of the @nypost's reporting on Joe Biden's ties to Burisma is a grave threat to our democracy. If Facebook continues to use its monopoly to control what news Americans have access to, they will face severe consequences. https://twitte…

• @scottgustin Scott Gustin on x

  BREAKING: Twitter has blocked the NY Post article about Hunter Biden. If you attempt to share the story, you will see this message: “We can't complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful.” https://twitter.com/…

• @noahmanskar Noah Manskar on x

  The Post's primary Twitter account (@nypost) has also been locked because the Hunter Biden stories violate its rules against “distribution of hacked material,” per email we received from Twitter https://twitter.com/...

• @andymstone Andy Stone on x

  This is part of our standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation. We temporarily reduce distribution pending fact-checker review. https://about.fb.com/...

• @ianbremmer Ian Bremmer on x

  Twitter banning the NY Post story on Joe/Hunter Biden is a mistake. Gives the piece more attention than it would otherwise get. And hard to make a credible argument that would see this specific article singled out for such treatment.

• @ichotiner Isaac Chotiner on x

  BREAKING: A bunch of people who have given completely contradictory advice to social media giants for the last four years are shocked and outraged that social media giants are clueless.

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  One more thing: it is also an old Cold War disinformation tactic to pass information, especially but not exclusively when forged, to low-brow newspapers that have high circulation and low standards of investigation. Ideal for surfacing and amplification.

• @hawleymo Josh Hawley on x

  This is amazing. Now @Twitter joins @Facebook in censoring the @nypost reporting on Biden. You almost get the idea #bigtech wants to buy this election https://twitter.com/...

• @alxthomp Alex Thompson on x

  The Trump campaign is responding by tweeting out the article in 280 characters bits. https://twitter.com/...

• @tedcruz Ted Cruz on x

  My letter to @jack regarding @Twitter's censorship of the @nypost. https://twitter.com/...

• @twittersafety @twittersafety on x

  Commentary on or discussion about hacked materials, such as articles that cover them but do not include or link to the materials themselves, aren't a violation of this policy. Our policy only covers links to or images of hacked material themselves.

• @evelyndouek Evelyn Douek on x

  Facebook is reducing distribution of a story before it has been fact-checked. I don't know what the rule is that enables that. Not saying it's not the right call, but I can think of many other instances this could be useful too, so would like to know on what basis. https://twitte…

• @kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x

  Twitter spokesperson tells me it's blocking link because of the way the info was obtained: “In line with our Hacked Materials Policy, as well as our approach to blocking URLs, we are taking action to block any links to or images of the material in question on Twitter.”

• @kenklippenstein Ken Klippenstein on x

  Kinda doubt anyone would've given a shit about the NY Post story if Twitter hadn't taken it down

• @ggreenwald Glenn Greenwald on x

  You're seeing the immense, unchallengeable, unaccountable power of Silicon Valley giants over the flow of information. Imagine if Google joins in. What's so amazing is that they never wanted this role. It was foisted on them by people, led by journalists, demanding they censor: h…

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  Also, the revealed emails are shared as image files, not in a file format that would contain header information and metadata. That makes it harder to analyze and verify the files. https://twitter.com/...

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  A lot of these policies have been introduced in the last month. Twitter just banned, as far as I saw, no prior explanation (FB at least attempted explanation). Yet another second-wave meta-story about a moderation choice that turns the story itself into forbidden knowledge. https…

• @chrisismills Chris Mills Rodrigo on x

  interesting challenge for this step by facebook: all of the aggregations of the new york post's story getting lots of interactions. i've reached out to see if these will be limited as well https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...

• @hawleymo Josh Hawley on x

  So @Facebook is going to actively censor a @nypost investigative story on the Democrat candidate for president. But rest assured, Facebook is a neutral platform with no political viewpoints! https://twitter.com/...

• @zck Zak Kukoff on x

  Thanks to Jack for handing tech opponents their biggest victory yet

• @jason @jason on x

  Last week: these platforms need to be policed!! This week: how dare you censor me!!

• @alxthomp Alex Thompson on x

  from @yashar, Twitter defends decisions based on “Hacked Material Policy.” What constitutes hacked material tho? Snowden leaks? How about WikiLeaks state department cables? Are Podesta emails now off-limits on Twitter? here's their page. https://help.twitter.com/... https://twitt…

• @mzhemingway Mollie on x

  The New York Times never even pretended to explain how it hacked Trump's tax records and yet Twitter *promoted* links to their stories. Media outlets didn't decline to cover that story. These are lies. Do not believe their lies. They are lying to you. https://twitter.com/...

• @ggreenwald Glenn Greenwald on x

  The last thing that surprises me is that Democrats like this are giddy about censorship. There's a huge authoritarian strain in US liberalism you're about to see vividly after the election. Mark Zuckerberg is a wise, benevolent Daddy figure who will protect us all: he knows best …

• @nycsouthpaw Southpaw on x

  The New York Post actually has its own website, its own printing presses, its own distribution fleet, and a closely-allied Murdoch-owned tv network. What business does a US congressman have badgering other companies to platform its propaganda? https://twitter.com/...

• @trevortimm Trevor Timm on x

  Not allowing links to news outlets *discussing* hacked documents seems incredibly extreme. If Trump's tax returns were hacked, Twitter wouldn't allow people to link to @nytimes front page stories about them?

• @jason @jason on x

  I'm a huge fan of fact-checking and alerting folks on social media to stories being disputed. That feels like that right solution. However, Twitter blocking this NYPOST Hunter Biden story from being shared—even if it is bogus—does not feel like the right solution thoughts?

• @heminator Mark Hemingway on x

  If Twitter has a “hacked materials policy” why wouldn't this policy be applied to stories about Trump's tax returns which were illegally obtained? https://twitter.com/...

• @xor Parker Higgins on x

  That explains some of the difference in the reactions to Twitter's policies on Blue Leaks and on this Post story. It's a big difference! Outside of the rightwing information ecosystem, Twitter can effectively make these things disappear. Inside it, maybe not.

• @fawfulfan Matthew Chapman on x

  Imagine if Twitter had worked up the nerve to do this with the Clinton Foundation hoaxes, or the Podesta emails, or any of the other fake news botnets and foreign troll ops in 2016. The world might be a much better, safer place today. https://twitter.com/...

• @rudygiuliani Rudy W. Giuliani on x

  “Censorship should be condemned! cc: @Twitter & Facebook NOT the American way!” - @PressSec

• @jenniferjjacobs Jennifer Jacobs on x

  Twitter locks more White House posts. https://twitter.com/...

• @mmasnick Mike Masnick on x

  This is amazing. “Constitutional” lawyer Josh Hawley apparently unfamiliar with the 1st Amendment. You almost get the idea the GOP wants to lie and cheat and force platforms to carry blatant disinformation. https://twitter.com/...

• @wexler Nu Wexler on x

  Twitter and Facebook have higher standards for election disinformation than the fourth-largest newspaper in the United States.

• @kimzetter Kim Zetter on x

  Twitter says it's blocking tweets of NY Post story because story uses hacked material. What was hacked? If computer repair shop in Delaware had authorized access to computer not sure any hacking was involved. It's unauthorized use of data, but not really “hacked” data is it?

• @xor Parker Higgins on x

  It's worth noting that the contemporary right-wing information ecosystem behaves differently from more “mainstream” environments, and so familiar dynamics might not show up in the same way

• @benyt Ben Smith on x

  The platforms are just flailing, without clear rules, to give journalists and critics what platforms think they want. Does this mature into some governance system? Or do governments create they? https://twitter.com/...

• @ritapanahi Rita Panahi on x

  Twitter regularly pushes fake or debunked stories, allows such stories to trend & has actively promoted disinformation. Now big tech is disappearing a factual story damaging to Biden's campaign. https://nypost.com/...

• @neeratanden Neera -Vote Early- Tanden on x

  I find it odd reporters are not more concerned about disinformation. But maybe I shouldn't be. https://twitter.com/...

• @neerajka Neeraj K. Agrawal on x

  Social networks should block all links to news articles until they can be independently verified

• @krystalball Krystal Ball on x

  This is completely insane and will 100% come back to bite the left. Censorship always ends up being a tool for preserving the status quo. Mark my words. https://twitter.com/...

• @trevortimm Trevor Timm on x

  No one really knows for sure, but there was a lot of speculation that the Panama Papers were hacked and then given to journalists. Should Twitter wipe out all those old links too? https://twitter.com/...

• @ryangrim Ryan Grim on x

  Folks cheering this have the ability to see about 2 inches in front of their face. https://twitter.com/...

• @tedcruz Ted Cruz on x

  It's fair to say @ggreenwald and I aren't exactly ideological birds of a feather. But on this he is EXACTLY right. #EndBigTechCensoship https://twitter.com/...

• @greg_price11 Greg Price on x

  Lifelong Democratic staffer, now comms person at Facebook, boasting about limiting the distribution of a story unflattering to a Democrat. What do you even do to fact check a story like this? https://twitter.com/...

• @xor Parker Higgins on x

  For example, the Streisand Effect isn't really the issue when there's enough coordination or alignment among the handful of important information sources about what the day's story is

• @xor Parker Higgins on x

  And to be blunt, there's a willingness to just use proper nouns in place of actual reporting. You can see it in the long lists of names the president tweets sometimes, blowing enough smoke that nobody really cares if there's fire

• @lhfang Lee Fang on x

  The Pentagon Papers, Snowden's NSA docs, the FBI files revealing COINTELPRO, Trump's tax returns — all of these files were taken without authorization and released through the press. Would Twitter censor all of these stories? https://twitter.com/...

• @mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x

  What I do agree with is that it's bad for Facebook/Twitter to operate in this middle ground where they selectively invoke free speech principles to evade scrutiny of editorial decisions while *not* serving as common carriers and *sometimes* imposing editorial judgment after all.

• @mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x

  Congress could enact legislation to make all social media companies — or some subset of them — act like common carriers. But they keep not doing that, perhaps for good reasons.

• @mathewi Mathew Ingram on x

  Twitter block seems to hit the regular URL but not the Amp version https://twitter.com/...

• @ericlevitz Eric Levitz on x

  If I wanted to direct more attention to the Post's dumb Hunter story, I would dubiously censor it on my social media platform. Obviously that isn't what happened here, just saying that it seems like a bad move from every angle

• @pinboard @pinboard on x

  This is the same platform that YOLO'ed Trump's threats to nuke North Korea back in the day. Twitter needs a full-time CEO https://twitter.com/...

• @cwarzel Charlie Warzel on x

  this'll end up getting conflated with the Facebook move, which is fundamentally different. anyhow, this probably just juiced this story into a secondary, more powerful news cycle. imagine more ppl will talk/learn about it now, as a result of twitter trying to cut off distribution…

• @kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x

  What happens when you click NYPost's Hunter Biden story link on Twitter —> https://twitter.com/...

• @kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x

  And the Post's Twitter page: https://twitter.com/...

• @jasondashbailey Jason Boo-ley on x

  Lol I would like to speak to Facebook's manager https://twitter.com/...

• @alex @alex on x

  government so small that you can weaponize it to bully private companies who don't agree with your politics https://twitter.com/...

• @benedictevans Benedict Evans on x

  I am exasperated by all the ways FB has been careless, oblivious or inept - but I am also exasperated by the idea that anything that FB gets wrong is because of their malice or stupidity, and by the idea that Zuck has a big red button he could press to just fix all of this.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  As far as the Biden article: FB is using “reduce” to enable “inform”. It is buying some time for verification of a very significant story that itself falls under a different policy area - concern about the veracity of leaked material pursuant to an election.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  The factchecks eventually came out, 2 days after the fact. See my pinned tweet for how this all played out, and what impact those factchecks had. Had they throttled distribution to give fact-checkers time to act, the spread of false info could have been managed far better.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  Coming up with policies & new mechanisms to address virality, and curation, are two of the most significant things platforms and the public, and likely regulators, need to do to address the most destructive facets of the current information environment.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  which triggered a second-wave story about the outrageous censorship of taking down a video claiming microbes in sand would cure COVID and ppl shouldn't wear masks. My personal opinion is that the takedown was a bad call; turned the misinfo actor into a martyr for free speech.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  And then there is “reduce” - throttling virality, not pushing the share of the content into the feeds of friends of the person sharing it. This is now apparently also being cast as censorship, because ppl are trying to reframe *distribution* as speech (when it is reach)

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  One of the significant sources of frustration around Plandemic for me was that there were very clear signals that the person in the video had been trying to go viral for weeks, and that the video itself appeared to be getting a lot of pickup. The platforms knew. They waited.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  I think this is actually a very good use of the policy levers at its disposal. It is also doing this transparently, despite the fact that the censorship-howlers, who also think factchecking is censorship, immediately began howling about censorship. No big shock there.

• @noupside Renee DiResta on x

  There are 3 action buckets FB (and most others) use for moderation: remove, reduce, inform. Remove is takedown - when that happens there is a discussion of censorship. Inform is factceck - when THAT happens there is ALSO a discussion of censorship, which is ridiculous ref-working

• @benedictevans Benedict Evans on x

  My mental model for Facebook stories is that they fit into three categories: 1: FB fucking up 2: 'It's complicated' 3: 'That's not really a story' (or it's a story about something else) Every week there's at least one in each category - the challenge is to work out which.

• @benedictevans Benedict Evans on x

  The challenge right now: We connected everyone, including the assholes, the idiots and our own worst instincts... and including all the things people fight about. And all of that is on Facebook. And they screw up a lot, but it's not simple or easy.

• @cwarzel Charlie Warzel on x

  a great deal of the FB is censoring speech comments right now ignores the fact that what you see on facebook is not just a raw feed of content (and suggests that there's absolutely no gaming of the system happening). these issues are complicated! https://twitter.com/...

• @cwarzel Charlie Warzel on x

  whatever your views on this issue can we agree that: 1) we live in hell 2) platforms r making this up as they go 3) 96% of the media/political class dont know what they're talking about 4) speech issues r generally way more thorny than the binary discussion we'd all like to have …

• @mtgreenee @mtgreenee on x

  THIS IS BLATANT CENSORSHIP! The Silicon Valley Cartel has taken the First Amendment and ripped it to shreds. Facebook's Democrat spokesman is proudly announcing their election interference. When I get to Congress, Big Tech will be held accountable! https://twitter.com/...

• @rabois Keith Rabois on x

  @fmanjoo FEC violation for illegal corporate contribution.

• @rmac18 @rmac18 on x

  @sheeraf ok, but the point is facebook is making a judgment call to deem them “questionable” in the first place. and folks should wonder why the company has made that judgment in the first place and what policy it's using to do so. @andymstone

• @liz_franczak Liz Franczak on x

  this is so ridiculous https://twitter.com/...

• @liz_franczak Liz Franczak on x

  what the fuck is a third party fact checker? absolutely want those people, hired by Zuckerberg and his investors and share holders, ~curating~ The News for me, fantastic work everyone

• @timcast Tim Pool on x

  Facebook is evil https://twitter.com/...

• @sarahfrier Sarah Frier on x

  it's not that insane for Facebook to reduce distribution of a story pending fact-checker approval. Last year they said this is what they would do if they have signals a piece of content is false: https://about.fb.com/... https://twitter.com/...

• @garycoby @garycoby on x

  Democrat Operative using his Corporate position at @Facebook to influence the United States Election. @andymstone is working with his coworkers in the Democrat party to... Shadow ban news that Joe Biden lied and knew about his son Hunter's corrupt foreign business deals. https://…

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  Respect, Facebook https://twitter.com/...

• @judiciarygop House Judiciary Gop on x

  Big Tech claims they aren't biased. Then they do this. Insanity. https://twitter.com/...

• @aunkurarya Aunkur Arya on x

  For a company that publicly stated in May that they don't want to be the arbiter of truth, we are seeing a lot of moves just in the last week of Facebook weeding out grossly inaccurate information on their platform. I'm for it. https://twitter.com/...

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  First, the surfacing. This here is highly suspicious behavior. Especially when viewed in the context of a political campaign. Creative, anonymous, credibility-generating, somewhat plausible. Exactly how a professional would surface disinformation and potentially forgeries. https:…

• @donaldjtrumpjr Donald Trump Jr on x

  This is straight-up election interference by @Facebook, being announced by their comms person who touts in his bio numerous past jobs with Dems. Big Tech is openly trying to rig this election for Biden & should be held accountable immediately. @FCC @senjudiciary @SenateCommerce h…

• @bobbybigwheel Aaron on x

  Facebook thinks Biden's gonna win https://twitter.com/...

• @rmac18 @rmac18 on x

  It's *good* that FB is telling ppl that it did something, but it's not great that we are left guessing why they did it. (Imagine a scenario where they did limit distribution and didn't tell anyone, and it came out later). To be fully transparent, FB needs to say why it did it.

• @rmac18 @rmac18 on x

  If FB doesn't provide a policy for why it was actioned folks are just going to assume the company took action against content it didn't like. The implications of that are super dangerous for a company that's long told the public that it doesn't want to make editorial decisions.

• @martinsfp Martin Sfp Bryant on x

  Feels with this NY Post story that the 2020 election disinformation swamp has become even more swampy, and platforms are starting to be tested on their plans to deal with this stuff. https://www.theverge.com/...

• @fmanjoo Farhad Manjoo on x

  How about ... on the grounds that they have a first amendment right to do whatever they want? that enough? a little something I like to call the us constitution https://twitter.com/...

• @rmac18 @rmac18 on x

  I'm confused by this. Facebook spox attempts to be transparent by claiming that the social network has limited the distribution of the NYPost Biden story, but doesn't say exactly what policy the company is applying to take that action. https://twitter.com/...

• @dbongino Dan Bongino on x

  HOLY SHIT! This Facebook executive is openly admitting to election interference and anti-competitive behavior in an effort to assist the Democrats. Facebook is admitting it all. 👇🏻👇🏻 👇🏻👇🏻 👇🏻👇🏻 👇🏻👇🏻 👇🏻 https://twitter.com/...

• @judiciarygop House Judiciary Gop on x

  Facebook has decided to suppress a piece of journalism that the Democrats don't like. They also want you to believe that they're not a publisher. Time for this to end. https://twitter.com/...

• @tomcottonar Tom Cotton on x

  A healthy democracy depends on the free flow of ideas. Tech giants openly admit to suffocating a story that isn't helpful to their chosen political candidate. Unacceptable and un-American. https://twitter.com/...

• @byronyork Byron York on x

  Facebook says it is ‘reducing [the] distribution’ of the New York Post's report that Hunter Biden introduced an executive for the Ukrainian company that was paying him to his father when Joe Biden was vice president. https://twitter.com/...

• @mzhemingway Mollie on x

  Holy bleeping bleep. Facebook explicitly admitting it is protecting Biden — and interfering in the presidential election — by censoring media outlets and limiting discussion of today's breaking news about Biden's engagement with Burisma. https://twitter.com/...

• @peterjhasson Peter J. Hasson on x

  Facebook comms guy, a former Dem staffer, announces that Facebook is going to suppress a piece of journalism that Dems don't like https://twitter.com/...

• @ridt Thomas Rid on x

  Bottom line: *every individual little fact*—every email, every detail mentioned in an email—must be verified when data is surfaced in such a suspicious way, not just one piece of information, say a photo. It appears that The New York Post did not do that here.

• @sheeraf Sheera Frenkel on x

  This is what Facebook does with all questionable stories until they are reviewed by independent fact checkers. https://twitter.com/...

• @ggreenwald Glenn Greenwald on x

  Look carefully at what Twitter is saying to justify censoring the Biden story. If applied consistently, it'd mean that some of history's most consequential journalism — the Pentagon Papers, WikiLeaks' war logs, Snowden docs, Panama Papers, our Brazil Archive — would be banned. ht…

• @martinsfp Martin Sfp Bryant on x

  Explaining contentious moderation decisions needs to be done at the time the moderation occurs. I imagine there's a lot of learning going on at Twitter and Facebook tonight about how they tackle this stuff as it no doubt escalates over the next couple of weeks 😬 https://twitter.c…

• @jack @jack on x

  @RubinReport @nypost No

• @yoda Drew Olanoff on x

  by not having a stance and being sloppy af both companies have asked for this. https://twitter.com/...

• @rubinreport Dave Rubin on x

  @jack @nypost Do you shadowban based on political beliefs? Simple yes or no will do...

• @robbysoave Robby Soave on x

  Twitter is now claiming it was the images in the NY Post article that raised alarm bells, which strikes me as a completely ex post facto justification https://twitter.com/...

• @lanceulanoff Lance Ulanoff on x

  Some clarification from @Jack. What a day. https://twitter.com/...

• @conor64 Conor Friedersdorf on x

  This would have resulted in censoring the Pentagon Papers https://twitter.com/...

• @kellymakena Makena Kelly on x

  rapid response moderation necessitates rapid response comms https://twitter.com/...

• @hawleymo Josh Hawley on x

  .@Twitter @jack this is not nearly good enough. In fact, it's a joke. It's downright insulting. I will ask you - and @Facebook - to give an explanation UNDER OATH to the Senate subcommittee I chair. These are potential violations of election law, and that's a crime https://twitte…

• @mzhemingway Mollie on x

  THE COMMUNICATION IS NOT THE PROBLEM. THE ELECTION INTERFERENCE IS THE PROBLEM. IT MUST BE STOPPED. https://twitter.com/...

• @evelyndouek Evelyn Douek on x

  .@jack's right: *how* platforms moderate matters https://twitter.com/...

• @qjurecic Quinta Jurecic on x

  I think this still runs into difficult situations (see @jacklgoldsmith's work on the “wikileaks-ization” of the press), but it draws a line that's a lot clearer than we initially knew https://twitter.com/...

• @jacklgoldsmith Jack Goldsmith on x

  Here are 2 pieces on the problem. https://www.lawfareblog.com/ ... & https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ .... Under this policy Twitter would ban stories re hacked Sony emails, the Panama Papers, the hacked NSA and CIA offensive cyber tools, probably Snowden's documents and Chels…

• @dhume Sadanand Dhume on x

  Incredibly dumb of @Twitter at multiple levels. This will only: 1. Make ordinary people mistrust the platform and hurt Twitter's already tarnished brand. 2. Get more people to read the @nypost story they're trying to stop people from sharing. https://twitter.com/...

• @amykremer Amy Kremer on x

  Still blocking because “spammy” or “unsafe” This is election interference & an in-kind contribution to the Biden campaign. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...

• @evelyndouek Evelyn Douek on x

  Kudos to Twitter for giving a much clearer explanation. Eventually. https://twitter.com/...

• @millerstream Jon Miller on x

  So here we have a FB employee admitting they reduce the distribution of a story they didn't like about Hunter Biden before they even bothered to fact check it because it shed too negative a light on their preferred candidate. https://twitter.com/...

• @therfangle @therfangle on x

  Another example of tech censorship at it's finest. Facebook will now censor articles on the latest Hunter Biden story. https://twitter.com/...

• @andrewhclark @andrewhclark on x

  Here's the New York Post story that Facebook has decided you aren't allowed to read. Pass it on. https://nypost.com/...

• @jackposobiec Jack Posobiec on x

  Facebook now says they are censoring the NY Post article on Hunter Biden But are they censoring posts about Bunter Hiden?