Twitter’s Underhanded Actions Targeting ‘Libs Of TikTok’ Revealed In New ‘Twitter Files’ Release | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Ryan Saavedra.

    The latest release of the "Twitter Files" Thursday evening revealed that leftists at the highest level of the company, who have all since been fired or been forced to resign, targeted one of the most popular right-wing accounts on the platform with repeated suspensions despite the fact that they secretly admitted that she did not do anything wrong.

    Journalist Bari Weiss released a long Twitter thread in which she showed how Twitter built blacklists, prevented disfavored tweets from trending on the platform, and actively limited the visibility of entire accounts and even trending topics in secret, without informing users.

    Weiss noted the different layers of censorship that existed at Twitter and that the highest level was 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," Weiss said. "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.'"

    Weiss showed how Libs of TikTok was placed on a "Trends Blacklist" and that a special note was placed on the account that said action could not be taken on the account "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," Weiss said. "Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter's policy against 'hateful conduct.'"

    However, those at the highest level secretly admitted that they knew Libs of TikTok did not violate any of the site's rules, yet they wanted her suspended.

    Twitter said in a secret memo:

    Site Policy Recommendation

    Site Policy recommends placing @LibsOfTiktok ([LTT] 1.3M followers, not verified) in a 7-day timeout at the account level [meaning, not for a specific Tweet] based on the account's continued pattern of indirectly violating Twitter's Hateful Conduct Policy by tweeting content that either leads to or intends to incite harassment against individuals and institutions that support LGBTQ communities. At this time, Site Policy has not found explicitly violative Tweets, which would result in a permanent suspension of the account.

    This type of enforcement action [repeated 7-day timeouts at the account-level] will not lead to permanent suspension, however: should LTT engage in any other direct Tweet-level violations of any of Site Policy's policies, we will move forward with permanent suspension.

    Assessment

    Since its most recent timeout, while LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy, the user has continued targeting individuals/allies/supporters of the LGBTQIA+ community for alleged misconduct.

    Weiss then showed how Twitter took a much different approach when Libs of TikTok reported that she was the victim of harassment on the platform that violated its terms of service.

    "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," Weiss said. "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."

poll#128

Where do you stand on the wanton censorship by Big Tech Platforms, while retaining their Section 230 carveout indemnifying them for Slander /Defamation lawsuits and Copyright infringements?

  Big Tech Platforms have the right to Censor all speech providing they voluntarily relinquish their Section 230 Carveout.

  Big Tech Platforms DO NOT have the right to Censor any speech, while retaining multiple indemnifications by virtue of the Section 230 Carveout.

  I know nothing of this 230 talk, but "I do love me some social media".

476 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?