The crux of the study seems to be that while, yes, conservatives were definitively censored more often, that it was "deserved" because they were spreading misin

The crux of the study seems to be that while, yes, conservatives were definitively censored more often, that it was "deserved" because they were spreading misinformation. However, how the study defined "misinformation" was via a separate referenced study that basically just asked 1000 people on mechanical turk (and 8 "independent" fact checkers) whether they trusted particular news sources. The sources that were voted by random members of the public as less trustworthy were then classified as "misinformation spreaders". So there was really no objective evaluation of whether anything the censored conservatives said was actually true or false, real or fake, legitimate or not, hurtful or helpful, or any type of analysis, it just came down to whether they more were often referencing sites that random members of the public hold the belief of being wrongthink spreaders.