> It seems disingenuous to absolve them of all sins if their data is hugely incorrect to the point where it's fraudulent just because they added that loop hole.

> It seems disingenuous to absolve them of all sins if their data is hugely incorrect to the point where it's fraudulent just because they added that loop hole. If there's an actual industry standard then you could argue that Twitter is lying. However as everyone in the legal community knows there are two important concepts here: wilfulness and negligence. Did Twitter willfully do this or is this just because there isn't an actual standard methodology but tried to do their best-effort anyways? Is Twitter aware of problems in its methodology that can be solved but were left as-is? Conversely, did an external party intentionally misinterpreted those numbers so that that party can paint a different picture that what Twitter actually claims?