[grandalf]

What is concerning is that Twitter controls a massive platform and has revealed itself to be heavily biased and intent upon ideological control of the content that exists on its platform.

My statement is simply my opinion, I am not controlling anyone else's access to a platform or to information by holding that opinion. I encourage you to read some RT stories.

You will find that the reporting is generally solid but simply lacks the "Rah Rah USA USA" attitude that has become (embarrassingly) commonplace in our culture. I cringe when I see politicians wearing red or blue ties and American flag pins, as if doing that signals their devout patriotism.

It's a similarly shallow world view that leads people to overlook RT's reporting and focus on its state sponsored origin before evaluating its contribution to American political discourse.

I'd personally prefer if there were more anger about certain kinds of issues in the US -- such as the Flint Water crisis, lead in the water in many cities, foolish and corrupt infrastructure projects, etc.

[tyleraldrich]

> What is concerning is that Twitter controls a massive platform and has revealed itself to be heavily biased and intent upon ideological control of the content that exists on its platform.

Your entire post is making the assumption that Twitter did this because they just believed the US/Russia election meddling stories or something.

Maybe there was clear and documented malice involved? Who knows! Certainly not you. But, reading this and immediately thinking "Twitter has now admitted they are on the side of the Democrats and believes all these Russia stories" is foolish and fails to consider that maybe something weird _might_ be going on, and maybe Twitter actually made a good decision here.

Don't worry about me though, I read plenty of international news - but I'm not going to bother with state sponsored organizations like RT.

[grandalf]

> malice involved

Then why not mention that in the announcement? The problem is that Twitter is not pointing to any specific content that it is willing to admit was harmful. Doing that would give us too clear a glimpse into the ideological view Twitter holds.

I rarely read RT myself, but like seeing stories that shine light upon problems with American institutions and infrastructure, as well as problems and hypocrisy around foreign policy and humanitarian issues.

We have concentration camps in Gitmo, a prison system where inmates are routinely victimized by rape, and yet there is this idea that any news org that doesn't aggressively cheerlead "USA USA" is harming our democracy. I'd like our democracy to develop the teeth necessary to fix/eliminate the prisons and camps, and evict some of the most corrupt officials -- Paul Ryan has been a public servant his whole life and mysteriously has a net worth of over $8M. The Clintons are worth over $250M after a few decades in public service. What is going on here, we have to be willing to see the ugliness of our system and the corruption that is all around us.

If RT helps us see that and take corrective action, all the better. Ironically I think those opposed to the sort of discord RT might cause are implicitly idealizing a compliant public like one might find in a well-controlled fascist state.