[mrcwinn]

It posted as I saved. I edited my comment to reflect that, though my point still holds. Calling it "a flop" is consistent with their recent bias (or pandering?) and ignores the substance of the matter almost entirely.

Perhaps with some investigatory reporting The Verge could have broken this story themselves a year ago -- "the right way."

[andreysolsty]

You're probably ignoring your own bias in this (and I say this as someone with no stake in US politics and who cares very little about Twitter). I read the thread expecting some huge revelation and there was none. Flop describes it pretty accurately.

1. Governments and public figures ask social media company to review posts that may violate ToS and/or law.

2. Social media company reviews posts with some internal debate and comes to conclusion.

Big deal.

The only thing that's really concerning in this is how much importance Twitter has when it comes to US politics and that it's now owned by one billionaire who's openly political (and spreads conspiracy theories). I can't imagine much debate happening in these content reviews anymore when the boss openly fires people who have the nerve to disagree with him.

[archagon]

Or maybe the point is that there is no substance?