>the other side has been mostly de-platformed by now.
This is probably my biggest peeve when it comes about discussions on Twitter. The media has made it seem that Twitter just routinely bans conservatives voices for "a difference of opinion" when that is not the case. Twitter's high profile bans are on Wikipedia, and they weren't banned for simply saying "abortion should be repealed".
Banning is one thing, but what about full or actually partial shadow-banning, or deleting selected specific posts which is called moderation, and the overall balance of the biases in the moderation.
>but what about full or actually partial shadow-banning,
Of all the big social networks, Twitter has been the only one to keep the use of chronological feeds. What does "shadow banning" mean when all your tweets are chronological for everyone you follow? Do you actually use Twitter?
>or deleting selected specific posts which is called moderation
Every platform moderates; but now we have moved the goalposts from de-platforming to moderating. Twitter has a few isolated incidents where everyone will beat their chests (namely Hunter Biden and COVID), but those two incidents have failed to signify that Twitter has a systemic issue or bias.
When you actually dive into it; the problem of conservatives being "cancelled" on Twitter comes from the Twitter Mob, aka, other Twitter users. What most of these people want is to post without consequence, "free speech for me but not for thee".
followed by
>the other side has been mostly de-platformed by now.
This is probably my biggest peeve when it comes about discussions on Twitter. The media has made it seem that Twitter just routinely bans conservatives voices for "a difference of opinion" when that is not the case. Twitter's high profile bans are on Wikipedia, and they weren't banned for simply saying "abortion should be repealed".