[Number157]

Every medium wants to reach as many people as possible. So they limit the visibility of what they don't like, but they don't completely get rid of people they don't like since they would no longer reach those groups.

Open basically any media and you'll see three categories:

(1) Opinion pieces.

(2) Attempts at appearing neutral by allowing opposing views, but always together with a commentary provided either by themselves or someone else to clearly provide objections.

(3) Safe easily sharable info. Like cute / funny pictures you can send to your friends which will get people into the site.

[Kaze404]

Fair enough. But is there any evidence to this? From my point of view, Twitter allows people like Steven Crowder, JK Rowling and Radical Feminists to use their platform to spread hate towards trans people, yet if I go there now and make a post with the word TERF in it I'll be suspended immediately.

Why is that a platform considered biased towards left thinking? Because it put warnings under probably false claims by far right presidents? The fact that it's only happened to Trump and Bolsonaro says more about right wing politics than about Twitter itself.

[lawnchair_larry]

LOL JK Rowling spreading hate? Don’t be ridiculous. I can’t believe people subscribe to that narrative.

[Kaze404]

There is no narrative.

[Number157]

> is there any evidence to this

Well yes. The pattern holds true pretty much 100% of the time for most media platforms. Newspapers, reddit, etc.

The second question I think was already addressed.