No, it wouldn't be either. It's an incomplete description that intentionally creates the misleading interpretation that this wasn't intentional censorship but a

No, it wouldn't be either. It's an incomplete description that intentionally creates the misleading interpretation that this wasn't intentional censorship but a mistake. In reality, this was intentional censorship, possibly applied in an overly broad way. Saying things to intentionally cause your audience to come to incorrect conclusions is lying. A reasonable description does not omit relevant details. Similar, if I said "My car accident was caused but human error" that would not be a correct or reasonable description if it were actually caused by my driving while drunk. I could as easily say it was caused by physics. The problem is that these lies elide my wrongdoing.