3 ms·
Which would've been more believable, if they literally did nothing about the thousands of tweets sharing the hacked Trucker rally database. And it wasn't just r
by mardifoufs 4y ago
Which would've been more believable, if they literally did nothing about the thousands of tweets sharing the hacked Trucker rally database. And it wasn't just random accounts, a lot of major north American/Canadian newspapers shared articles that not only mentionned the hacks and hinted at where to find them, but also explicitly detailed the contents of the database.
- stimpson_j_cat 4y agoYes that's the go-to copypasta reply. ("Literally" here meaning "not literally.") Twitter changed their policy in response to criticism of the Biden tweets to "no longer remove hacked material unless it’s directly shared by hackers or those working with them" including the rally database, and they restored previously removed tweets about Biden. So by your own measure, very believable.
- mardifoufs 4y agoThat's very convenient! The problem is that they didn't enforce that policy before the laptop leaks either. Not in any significant way and no media outlet ever got their account banned for reporting on a hack before (or after).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- stimpson_j_cat 4y agoThe ~7000 QAnon accounts they banned don't fit your narrative I'm afraid. There are now several intermediate steps they've added since then, like clear warnings [1]. This allows the account to stay active and still report on stolen data. Much better IMO, banning accounts is common practice, but too heavy-handed as to be the only tool Twitter has. https://twitter.com/TheGrayzoneNews/status/1363275582784552962 https://twitter.com/TheGrayzoneNews/status/13632755827845529...