Why is Twitter getting away with shadowbanning Ted Cruz?

[mystery-ak]

April 7, 2018
Why is Twitter getting away with shadowbanning Ted Cruz?
By Monica Showalter

Has Ted Cruz been shadowbanned by Twitter?

As Ace, at Ace of Spades, via Instapundit puts it, it "sure looks that way" (read the whole thing). He writes:

    "Shadowbanning" is a banning that's hidden from the user. They don't ban you outright, but they do block everyone except the people you most frequently interact with from seeing your tweets.

    A while ago, when I was still on twitter, one of my snarky comments would get 20, 40 retweets, at minimum. Then one day many of my tweets would get zero retweets, or 3.

    When Twitter suspended me, I didn't bother getting unsuspended, because I knew they'd already blocked my tweets from 99% of all potential readers. So why bother even using their piece of shit data-exploitation antisocial media?

    I would like Twitter to be quizzed heavily about this when they come before Congress to testify. Many conservatives are shadowbanned -- Mollie Hemingway seems to be. Michelle Malkin seems to be.

    And even Senator Ted Cruz seems to be.

    If this is not actually an open forum, they ought to say so. It's a simple matter of honest disclosure.

more
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/04/why_is_twitter_getting_away_with_shadowbanning_ted_cruz.html

[skeeter]

Because Cruz is pithy with a good sense of humor. He used Twitter to good effect before and they can't have that with an election coming up.

[Cyber Liberty]

If it can be proven Twitter is doing this, they have some serious 'splaining to do.  Cruz is running for reelection, and campaign communication is the purest form of political speech.  This would prove they are actively assisting O'Rourke.

[LauraTXNM]

This is very odd.  I don't follow Ted Cruz or Mollie Hemingway.   But I was able to read their feed both when I was logged in and when I was surfing anonymously.  So I don't think they're shadow-banned.  Perhaps TW has changed its display algorhythms like FB has.  Or maybe nothing has changed at all, and this writer is just wrong,

[ABX]

They are a private business and like them or not, they can decide what product they sell. They should have control over their content just like a Christian bookstore can choose not to offer Buddhist books.

[Cyber Liberty]

This is very odd.  I don't follow Ted Cruz or Mollie Hemingway.   But I was able to read their feed both when I was logged in and when I was surfing anonymously.  So I don't think they're shadow-banned.  Perhaps TW has changed its display algorhythms like FB has.  Or maybe nothing has changed at all, and this writer is just wrong,

It's like Bookface:  If you set out to read a writer, you see everything on their wall, but the Bookface news feeds to members are missing posts Bookface doesn't like.  That's "shadow banning."

[Hoodat]

They are a private business and like them or not, they can decide what product they sell. They should have control over their content just like a Christian bookstore can choose not to offer Buddhist books.

While I agree somewhat with what you say, the issue here is viewpoint discrimination.  They have already decided to sell a product allowing users to send messages throughout the universe.  They are now censoring this service based solely upon viewpoint.  It is not like your Christian bookstore example because the Christian bookstore does not invite all vendors to set up shop within its store.

As someone who has been shadowbanned by Discus, the only recourse here is to brand Twitter as yet another propaganda arm of the Democrat Party.

[Cyber Liberty]

While I agree somewhat with what you say, the issue here is viewpoint discrimination.  They have already decided to sell a product allowing users to send messages throughout the universe.  They are now censoring this service based solely upon viewpoint.  It is not like your Christian bookstore example because the Christian bookstore does not invite all vendors to set up shop within its store.

As someone who has been shadowbanned by Discus, the only recourse here is to brand Twitter as yet another propaganda arm of the Democrat Party.

Seems to me the same principles used to force Christian bakers to make cakes for gay weddings applies here.

[Hoodat]

Seems to me the same principles used to force Christian bakers to make cakes for gay weddings applies here.

The baker provides the final product.  Twitter only provides the easel.

[Cyber Liberty]

The baker provides the final product.  Twitter only provides the easel.

IIRC, the bakers were offering "blank easels" and that wasn't good enough.

If a radio station decided to refuse to air campaign ads for a Democrat while exclusively airing ads for his opponent, I think there would be some trouble.  I know that's an imperfect analogy, but it tempts Big Government to step in and create such a rule on the Internet.  They would justify it by deciding Twitter is a "common carrier."

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

How is he shadow banned? His tweets show up fine to me.