Twitter has been shadow banning a lot of pro-trump people lately.<p>For example Barack Obama's brother, Malik. His entire feed is basically Trump support and he was shadow banned the other day. I am happy that they have corrected the issue, they were called out hard for it.<p><a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=from%3Aobamamalik%20shadow&src=typd" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/search?q=from%3Aobamamalik%20shadow&src=...</a>
His feed died right around the time that half the internet (and Twitter) died due to the dyndns DDOS and he writes it off as a "coincidence" instead of the most likely cause. I'm normally a fan of Scott Adams, but it feels like he's getting a little tin foil hat as he is aging...
Censorship is a really concerning problem, with no obvious solution, when more and more of our communication is published by privately owned third-parties. The other frustrating thing is that this so often happens, and we don't even get a response from the censoring party. I know there is no expectation of free speech on a private platform, but it's still a serious social problem when everyone voluntarily publishes there anyway.
I wish that I hadn't read this link. I've enjoyed Dilbert for many years, and it will never be the same for me now that I know that Adams is crazy.
Even if this were true (he has no proof and the more likely explanation is a glitch), his thesis about this being treason is incorrect. Twitter is not required to host any content they don't like or want. Adams can still bring his message to other mediums.<p>Also, this post segues from conspiracy theory to political bolstering. It's likely he's using clickbait here to prop up his favored candidate.
A publisher choosing what content they want to publish and/or promote isn't "moral treason", it's the essence of free press.<p>If Adams is unhappy with Twitter, he is free to publish and promote his content via other means. Twitter not choosing to cooperate with him might be a contract issue between him and Twitter, but it's not an issue of Adams's liberty, which does not extend to directing Twitter's use of Twitter's resources.