Have you heard the story of how Elon Musk discovered that Twitter censored Tweets about Hunter Biden & Ukraine possibly giving Joe Biden an edge?
Twitter owner Elon Musk teased that he would reveal “what really happened” inside Twitter when it decided to temporarily suppress a 2020 New York Post story about Hunter Biden, son of former Vice President Joe Biden.
Rather than releasing a trove of documents, Musk’s big reveal focused on tweets from journalist Matt Taibbi, who had received emails largely correlating with what was already known about the incident.
The emails shown in Taibbi’s thread reveal Twitter employees debating how to handle the 2020 Hunter Biden story.
It appears that Twitter’s legal, policy, and communications teams were arguing – and sometimes disagreeing – about whether to restrict Hunter Biden’s father’s article under its hacked materials policy before the 2020 election.
Biden’s personal information was exposed when his laptop was taken to a repair store, and the owner of the store discovered private photos, among other items, showing the advocate’s dissolute partying and deviant behaviour.
Taibbi’s twitter thread drew thousands of retweets… Check it out here:
Following the suppression of the article, Taibbi noted one Democratic congressman, Ro Khanna.
In a letter to Twitter’s chief legal officer, Ro argued that suppressing a news report containing details that affect a presidential candidate was a bad look and a departure from First Amendment principles.
Khanna explained in the email that he was saying this even though he was a “total Biden partisan.”
The tweet thread also showed how politicians from both parties routinely contacted Twitter to request specific tweets be removed.
In the thread, Taibbi’s included a screenshot of an email from the “Biden team” asking for tweets to be deleted. According to CNN, some of those tweets may have violated Twitter policy because they contained photos that may have been of Hunter Biden, including nudity.
Soon after sharing Taibbi’s thread, Musk tweeted saying that the act of Twitter censoring the story is a “violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment.”
When it comes to serving a societal necessity like freedom of speech, what is the limit of a private company like Twitter? How far does their capacity for decision-making extend?
The consequences of such decisions can be felt by each and every one of us on a personal level. Is it not then appropriate to broadcast Twitter’s decisions as they are made, if we agree that it serves the good of society as a whole?
What is your take on the story?
Sayonara
Vusi Thembekwayo
