I've also seen evidence of posts Twitter likes (violent and hateful anti-immigration posts - literally a photo of a dummy tied to a chair being shot in the back of the head) being spammed by love bots.
Twitter seems to be a propaganda channel, run by Donald/Elon/et al.
Yeah I mean, if the only reason you said that was to "piss off the libs" and hate on transgender men, you really shouldn't be shocked that a platform doesn't want that. Being unable to say hateful things without consequence on social media isn't the same as it being a propaganda machine.
Suspended not banned. Also, in context the tweet was saying that the trans man was not a man and that was against the policy at the time. The pregnancy was just a detail there.
surely you realize that this is entertainment outlet is not a news organization, nor does this entertainment outlet have any obligation to report anything on a factual, truthful or verifiable basis? and that this entertainment outlet is famously bigoted?
This could also very well be explained by a ranking algorithm that optimizes for "engagement". Getting spammed by hate bots = "engagement". This would be perfectly consistent with what the guy is experiencing, minus the accusation that the platform is suppressing anti-ukraine posts, which is totally unsubstantiated.
As I understanding the timing, the post was suppressed until the hate bots spammed it.
Given the post was suppressed, how did the hate bots know about it to spam it?
It seems to me Twitter suppressed the post until they had time to spam it with hate posts.
Bear in mind here also this suppression did not happen for other posts - only for the pro-Ukraine post - so Twitter at the least is specifically suppressing pro-Ukraine posts.
>It seems to me Twitter suppressed the post until they had time to spam it with hate posts.
Twitter can't spam hate posts in real time? They're literally an AI company.
>Bear in mind here also this suppression did not happen for other posts - only for the pro-Ukraine post - so Twitter at the least is specifically suppressing pro-Ukraine posts.
There's scant evidence of this, besides the vague assertion that "I have 5k more followers there and regularly have posts which are viewed over 100k times". If he normally posts informative and substantive content that gets good engagement, is it really surprising that a generic "I support Zelensky" post would get poor engagement?
> Twitter can't spam hate posts in real time? They're literally an AI company.
I would expect they have a certain capacity and the flow of posts is very, very, very great.
Also, I would imagine a delay of some sort anyway - people would notice if a post immediately received hundred of one line generic "I hate this" replies. In this case, the hate posts began after 12 hours.
> is it really surprising that a generic "I support Zelensky" post would get poor engagement?
I may be wrong, but as I understand it, what you've described here is not what was described by the author.
As I understand it : one guy, two accounts, both long term, one BSky, one Twitter, same content. Approx same and large number of followers. On BSky, the test post has immediate, large-scale and positive response. On Twitter, this and this only post suppressed for IIRC 12 hours, then a massive number of hate-bot posts and then post made visible.
important notes from the essay, this not unique to twitter:
> And if you think this only happens on one social network, you’re already caught in the wrong attention loop.
> The most effective influence doesn’t announce itself. It doesn’t censor loudly, or boost aggressively. It shapes perception quietly — one algorithmic nudge at a time.
This definitely happens on other platforms as well but there is a key difference in noting that twitter is now privately owned by a single person who has shown themself to be insecure and prone to lashing publicly at critics.
I think twitter is uniquely concentrated in its influence by its owner and willingness to do things so blatantly, other platforms need to at least pretend to not steer things so directly as not to upset shareholders.
Billionaire buys social network for instant cultural and political influence. Including amplifying his own posts. Yet, hardly any alarm from the tech or mainstream
https://bsky.app/profile/willhaycardiff.bsky.social/post/3lk...
I've also seen evidence of posts Twitter likes (violent and hateful anti-immigration posts - literally a photo of a dummy tied to a chair being shot in the back of the head) being spammed by love bots.
Twitter seems to be a propaganda channel, run by Donald/Elon/et al.