"U.S. activists who thought Twitter was a secure way to communicate during demonstrations may" ... be delusional?
Twitter has to comply with US law, whatever it's possible for them to reconstruct and release about activists they can be compelled to release. They, so far, have done a decent job of being transparent, in the US, when they are allowed to be (things like national security letters with gag orders mean their, and everyone else's, claims to transparency have to be taken with a grain of salt).
How much Twitter is pushing back or not is besides the point. It's just stupid to expect more out of Twitter than it is legally possible for them to do.
Not always Tor, which is safe as far as I know IF you can get a Tor connection.
Plenty have been caught and killed or tortured thanks to US tech sold to their governments (and not using Tor level security) so I'm not sure about them being more savvy. The consequences are certainly higher, so they probably are more careful.
It's the domestic people who confuse me, no encryption, from a cell phone account in their name and then thinking "Twitter will break the law to protect me!"
Twitter has to comply with US law, whatever it's possible for them to reconstruct and release about activists they can be compelled to release. They, so far, have done a decent job of being transparent, in the US, when they are allowed to be (things like national security letters with gag orders mean their, and everyone else's, claims to transparency have to be taken with a grain of salt).
How much Twitter is pushing back or not is besides the point. It's just stupid to expect more out of Twitter than it is legally possible for them to do.