[jamienicol]

Actually the guardian headline is perfectly accurate. It completely is accurate to say the algorithm has a bias, even if that bias isn't "if (right-wing) then amplify()"

> If you search for the word “bias” in Twitter’s post you’ll not find support for The Guardian’s editorialization

But if you search for "favour" you'll find "[our findings revealed that] algorithmic amplification favours right-leaning news source". In the abstract. Which means the exact same thing.

> Here’s an important excerpt, which notes that more analysis is needed to understand whether the amplification is unnatural relative to user interactions

The guardian article includes your quote so I don't think you can accuse it of omitting important context.

> Twitter’s internal research is saying that certain tweets are organically more popular and engaging and more likely to be shown

I'm not sure where you're reading this from. It is pretty explicit that further research is required in to the cause of the discrepancy.