Officials from the Biden administration were “angry” that Twitter didn’t ban several accounts it identified as tweeting coronavirus “misinformation,” according to the latest release of the Twitter Files.
The latest batch of the Twitter files were released by author and journalist David Zweig and cover how Twitter suppressed debate about the coronavirs pandemic.
1. THREAD:
THE TWITTER FILES: HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE
– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy
– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed
– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022
“A December 2022 summary of meetings with the White House by Lauren Culbertson, Twitter’s Head of U.S. Public Policy, adds new evidence of the White House’s pressure campaign, and cements that it repeatedly attempted to directly influence the platform,” reported Zweig.
Zweig then posted a screenshot of part of Culbertson’s memo:
The Biden team was not satisfied with Twitter’s enforcement approach as they wanted Twitter to do more and to de-platform several accounts. Because of this dissatisfaction, we were asked to join several other calls. They were very angry in nature.
According to Zweig, Twitter “did not fully capitulate to the Biden team’s wishes,” noting that employees “debat[ed] moderation cases in great detail, and with more care than was shown by the government toward free speech.”
13. Twitter executives did not fully capitulate to the Biden team’s wishes. An extensive review of internal communications at the company revealed employees often debating moderation cases in great detail, and with more care than was shown by the government toward free speech.
— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022
“But Twitter did suppress views—many from doctors and scientific experts—that conflicted with the official positions of the White House. As a result, legitimate findings and questions that would have expanded the public debate went missing,” added Zweig.
16. Second, contractors, in places like the Philippines, also moderated content. They were given decision trees to aid in the process, but tasking non experts to adjudicate tweets on complex topics like myocarditis and mask efficacy data was destined for a significant error rate pic.twitter.com/lTISX00mo7
— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022
Zweig noted that in addition to the use of AI, content moderation was often outsourced to contractors with no medical or scientific background, who were asked to moderate comments made by scientists.
“Inevitably, dissident yet legitimate content was labeled as misinformation, and the accounts of doctors and others were suspended both for tweeting opinions and demonstrably true information,” wrote Zweig.
35. Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former head of Trust & Safety, had to explain that optimism wasn’t misinformation. pic.twitter.com/1pj8uvzWR1
— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022
At one point, Zweig posted a communication from Yoel Roth, who briefly became head of Trust & Safety under Elon Musk, had to explain to deputy general counsel Jim Baker that optimism about the future spread of COVID wasn’t misinformation.
Baker had asked if a tweet from President Trump telling people to not be afraid of COVID should be considered a violation of Twitter policy.
“Twitter made a decision, via the political leanings of senior staff, and govt pressure, that the public health authorities’ approach to the pandemic – prioritizing mitigation over other concerns – was “The Science,” concluded Zweig.
Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. He is the author of #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.