<story><title>The Twitter Files</title><url>https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Dig1t</author><text>&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;mtaibbi&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598827602403160064&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;mtaibbi&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598827602403160064&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Biden team asking Twitter to &amp;quot;handle&amp;quot; tweets they don&amp;#x27;t like.
This rubs me the wrong way, nobody in government should be telling Twitter to remove speech.</text></item><item><author>andreyk</author><text>It does not seem like this really exposed any new information - Twitter publicly justified its actions as being about its hacked data policy back when this all happened (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-cites-hacked-materials-policy-to-justify-censorship-of-ny-post-hunter-biden-article&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-cites-hacked-mat...&lt;/a&gt;). All this shows is some internal disagreement as to whether that was the right call. By the way, Facebook also suppressed the news story citing its misinformation policy (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.politifact.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;oct&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;look-behind-ny-post-headline-about-joe-biden-and-u&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.politifact.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;oct&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;look-behind-n...&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;p&gt;It was already widely criticized at the time(&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;variety.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;digital&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-files-blocked-ny-post-hunter-biden-censor-1235448481&amp;#x2F;?sub_action=logged_in&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;variety.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;digital&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-files-blocked-...&lt;/a&gt;):
&amp;quot; Twitter subsequently reversed the decision, saying that it had updated its hacked-materials policy and would not retroactively apply it to the New York Post. Other news outlets, including the New York Times, have since reported that the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter Biden and the documents on it were authentic. Predictably, Twitter’s blocking of the Post became a rallying point for Republican politicians accusing the social network of censoring conservative viewpoints. &amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;So... doesn&amp;#x27;t seem like a big deal, this is just confirming what was already known?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>romellem</author><text>Did you read your own source?&lt;p&gt;The Biden team never asked Twitter staff to “handle” anything. They forwarded tweets that [violated twitter’s ToS][1], a Twitter staff member forwarded them for &lt;i&gt;review,&lt;/i&gt; and at that point the reviewer said they “handled these.”&lt;p&gt;That’s what content moderation is supposed to do!&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;parkebench&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598841731763810304&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;parkebench&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598841731763810304&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>The Twitter Files</title><url>https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Dig1t</author><text>&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;mtaibbi&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598827602403160064&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;mtaibbi&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1598827602403160064&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Biden team asking Twitter to &amp;quot;handle&amp;quot; tweets they don&amp;#x27;t like.
This rubs me the wrong way, nobody in government should be telling Twitter to remove speech.</text></item><item><author>andreyk</author><text>It does not seem like this really exposed any new information - Twitter publicly justified its actions as being about its hacked data policy back when this all happened (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-cites-hacked-materials-policy-to-justify-censorship-of-ny-post-hunter-biden-article&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-cites-hacked-mat...&lt;/a&gt;). All this shows is some internal disagreement as to whether that was the right call. By the way, Facebook also suppressed the news story citing its misinformation policy (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.politifact.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;oct&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;look-behind-ny-post-headline-about-joe-biden-and-u&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.politifact.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;oct&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;look-behind-n...&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;p&gt;It was already widely criticized at the time(&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;variety.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;digital&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-files-blocked-ny-post-hunter-biden-censor-1235448481&amp;#x2F;?sub_action=logged_in&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;variety.com&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;digital&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;twitter-files-blocked-...&lt;/a&gt;):
&amp;quot; Twitter subsequently reversed the decision, saying that it had updated its hacked-materials policy and would not retroactively apply it to the New York Post. Other news outlets, including the New York Times, have since reported that the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter Biden and the documents on it were authentic. Predictably, Twitter’s blocking of the Post became a rallying point for Republican politicians accusing the social network of censoring conservative viewpoints. &amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;So... doesn&amp;#x27;t seem like a big deal, this is just confirming what was already known?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ryanbrunner</author><text>&amp;quot;Handle&amp;quot; could be &amp;quot;take down tweets on request of the Biden team without review&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;handle this request by the Biden team by considering our current policies and making an independent decision&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;Neither would be terribly surprising to me, although for sure the first is more damning. But Taibbi hasn&amp;#x27;t yet provided enough detail to know one way or another.&lt;p&gt;If it is just &amp;quot;prioritize this support request by a VIP&amp;quot; it&amp;#x27;s not particularly damning or even scandalous, I would assume that would be the case at any social media company.</text></comment>