The Twitter Files Scandal: Part Two
Elon Musk releases the second batch of incriminating tweets.
Big Tech and its social media platforms have been censoring conservative voices and suppressing free speech. The evidence of them doing so on behalf of the Democratic Party and the Biden administration is undeniable and verifiable.
Ask questions or post content about COVID-19 that runs counter to the Biden administration’s narrative and find yourself censored on social media. The same is true about other content that challenges the government’s preferred narratives. Even discussing censorship online can result in, well, censorship. Some posts simply disappear without notice or reasons given. It’s a convenient way for the censor to claim it never existed.
Social media censorship is achieved through a wide variety of mechanisms, ranging from complete bans, temporary bans, “shadow bans” (where often neither the user nor his audience is notified of the suppression of speech), deboosting, de-platforming, de-monetizing, restricting access to content, requiring users to take down content, and imposing warning labels that require click-through to access content, among others. These methods also include temporary and permanent suspensions of disfavored speakers. Twitter has its own unique names for censorship techniques.
The following list of tweets provide evidence of censorship by Twitter executives and employees. Elon Musk released Part Two this afternoon to Bari Weiss@bariweiss.
A new Twitter Files investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users.
Twitter once had a mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.” Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected.
Take, for example, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a “Trends Blacklist,” which prevented his tweets from trending.
Or consider the popular right-wing talk show host, Dan Bongino (@dbongino), who at one point was slapped with a “Search Blacklist.”
Twitter set the account of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) to “Do Not Amplify.”
Twitter denied that it does such things. In 2018, Twitter's Vijaya Gadde (then Head of Legal Policy and Trust) and Kayvon Beykpour (Head of Product) said: “We do not shadow ban.” They added: “And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”
What many people call “shadow banning,” Twitter executives and employees call “Visibility Filtering” or “VF.” Multiple high-level sources confirmed its meaning.
“Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool,” one senior Twitter employee told us.
“VF” refers to Twitter’s control over user visibility. It used VF to block searches of individual users; to limit the scope of a particular tweet’s discoverability; to block select users’ posts from ever appearing on the “trending” page; and from inclusion in hashtag searches.
All without users’ knowledge.
“We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.
The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team - Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 "cases" a day.
But there existed a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper. That is the “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support,” known as “SIP-PES.”
This secret group included Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust (Vijaya Gadde), the Global Head of Trust & Safety (Yoel Roth), subsequent CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.
This is where the biggest, most politically sensitive decisions got made. “Think high follower account, controversial,” another Twitter employee told us. For these “there would be no ticket or anything.”
One of the accounts that rose to this level of scrutiny was @libsoftiktok—an account that was on the “Trends Blacklist” and was designated as “Do Not Take Action on User Without Consulting With SIP-PES.”
The account—which Chaya Raichik began in November 2020 and now boasts over 1.4 million followers—was subjected to six suspensions in 2022 alone, Raichik says. Each time, Raichik was blocked from posting for as long as a week.
Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter’s policy against “hateful conduct.”
But in an internal SIP-PES memo from October 2022, after her seventh suspension, the committee acknowledged that “LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy." See here:
The committee justified her suspensions internally by claiming her posts encouraged online harassment of “hospitals and medical providers” by insinuating “that gender-affirming healthcare is equivalent to child abuse or grooming.”
Compare this to what happened when Raichik herself was doxxed on November 21, 2022. A photo of her home with her address was posted in a tweet that has garnered more than 10,000 likes.
When Raichik told Twitter that her address had been disseminated she says Twitter Support responded with this message: "We reviewed the reported content and didn't find it to be in violation of the Twitter rules." No action was taken. The doxxing tweet is still up.
Former Twitter executives repeatedly lied about the censorship. Jim Baker, the disgraced former FBI official, was caught suppressing evidence of censorship during Elon Musk’s public exposure of the censorship. Musk had him “exited’ off the property.
Link to access the Bari Weiss@bariweiss THREAD: THE TWITTER FILES PART TWO
thanks Philip...I've been restricted three times on LinkedIn with dozens of comments blocked. I suspect they have backed off because of several lawsuits against Big Tech that are pending
We need more people like you Vaughn, with the courage and integrity to bring these things to light.