[notl4wy3r]

I hate wikileaks, but I honestly don't see the contradiction in Twitter's behavior on this point.

Perhaps they were naive on whether RT was actually an aperture of Russian intelligence services. OK. Their KYC game could use some upping. OTOH, would anyone be surprised if the CIA were paying some little hedge fund somewhere to let them piggyback on access to Twitter's feed?

As far as Wikileaks' uninhibited operation goes, as far as I can tell, the CIA has not had its account banned from Twitter, just its firehose access. Does Wikileaks have access to that? What would they do with it if they did?

I mean it just seems like the line of questioning is, "Hey is it fair that you let them do X and won't let us do Y?" Maybe I can't see it because my silicon valley ass has no ethics.

[itronitron]

the core issue is the activity focused on influencing a US election, which foreign nationals and foreign corporations are prohibited from doing [1]

if Twitter cut off CIA from firehose access and then tried to sell Twitter advertising and analytic services to RT for a US election then that seems to be some poorly constructed PR staging by Twitter

1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/09...