In Bizarre Response, Twitter Tells Trump It Does Not "Shadowban" While Admitting It Does

In response to growing outrage over the practice of "shadow banning" conservatives, as confirmed last week by the liberal publication VICE and promptly tweeted about by President Trump, Twitter issued a strange explanation to "set the record straight," where they explicitly state that they do not engage in the practice - except then they describe how they do exactly that. 

"People are asking us if we shadow ban. We do not. But let’s start with, “what is shadow banning?”

The best definition we found is this: deliberately making someone’s content undiscoverable to everyone except the person who posted it, unbeknownst to the original poster." -Twitter 

Then, Twitter reiterates they don't shadow ban - with the caveat in parentheses that you may need to go directly to the timeline of some users in order to see their tweets. (tee hee!)

"We do not shadow ban. You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile). And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology." -Twitter 

In other words, Twitter says they don't shadow ban - it's just that tweets from people you follow may never appear unless you click directly into their timeline. 

Twitter's own employees admitted to the practice in a January undercover exposé, after investigative journalists with Project Veritas went undercover in San Francisco, Twitter's hometown. 

The first clip features a former Twitter software engineer who explains how/why Twitter "shadow bans" certain users:

Abhinav Vadrevu:  "One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don't know they've been banned, because they keep posting but no one sees their content."

"So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it. I don't know if Twitter does this anymore."

Then there was Olinda Hassan, a Policy Manager for Twitter’s Trust and Safety team explains on December 15th, 2017 at a Twitter holiday party that the development of a system of “down ranking” “shitty people” is in the works:

“Yeah. That’s something we’re working on. It’s something we’re working on. We’re trying to get the shitty people to not show up. It’s a product thing we’re working on right now.”

In the full video (see below) Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Nora explains that Twitter doesn't have an official written policy that targets conservative speech, but rather they were following "unwritten rules from the top":

“A lot of unwritten rules, and being that we’re in San Francisco, we’re in California, very liberal, a very blue state.You had to be… I mean as a company you can’t really say it because it would make you look bad, but behind closed doors are lots of rules.”

“There was, I would say… Twitter was probably about 90% Anti-Trump, maybe 99% Anti-Trump.”

Meanwhile, Pranay Singh reveals again just how creepy Twitter can be by digging into your profile and conversation history to determine whether or not you're a "redneck" and therefore worthy of being banned:

“Yeah you look for Trump, or America, and you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck. Then you look and parse all the messages, all the pictures, and then you look for stuff that matches that stuff.”

When asked if the majority of the algorithms are targeted against conservative or liberal users of Twitter, Singh said, “I would say majority of it are for Republicans.”

And in October, 2016, Dilbert creator Scott Adams was "shadowbanned" by  Twitter, which he noted on his blog: 

This weekend I got “shadowbanned” on Twitter. It lasted until my followers noticed and protested. Shadowbanning prevents my followers from seeing my tweets and replies, but in a way that is not obvious until you do some digging.

Why did I get shadowbanned?

Beats me.

But it was probably because I asked people to tweet me examples of Clinton supporters being violent against peaceful Trump supporters in public. I got a lot of them. It was chilling.

Late last week my Twitter feed was invaded by an army of Clinton trolls (it’s a real thing) leaving sarcastic insults and not much else on my feed. There was an obvious similarity to them, meaning it was organized. 

At around the same time, a bottom-feeder at Slate wrote a hit piece on me that had nothing to do with anything. Except obviously it was politically motivated. It was so lame that I retweeted it myself. The timing of the hit piece might be a coincidence, but I stopped believing in coincidences this year.

Brad Parscale, along with Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, wrote a letter in May calling for the CEOs of Facebook and Twitter to address concerns over conservative censorship ahead of the 2020 election, as well as a call for transparency.

"We recognize that Facebook and Twitter operate in liberal corporate cultures," the letter reads. "However, rampant political bias is inappropriate for a widely used public forum."


Cryptopithicus Homme Stan522 Fri, 07/27/2018 - 11:15 Permalink

Conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians need to "Walk Away" from Libtard social media.  What's worth more to you?  Your freedom of speech and association or some pictures of the kids, grand kids that could just get emailed to you anyway?

These scumbag companies make it as hard as possible to actually delete your account permanently too. Or deliberately obfuscate between deleting and deactivating so they can still count you as an "active user".

How to permanently delete Facebook:…

How to permanently delete Twitter:

How to delete



And MySpace is the perfect telling example of what happens when a social media company implodes.  Your photos are just stuck online in limbo for everyone including friends and prospective employers to see forever.  There is nobody to phone or email to delete your content.  Don't like it?  Too bad!  Delete your social media before it becomes the next MySpace!


In reply to by Stan522

macholatte Cryptopithicus Homme Fri, 07/27/2018 - 11:20 Permalink



The Progs’ weapon of choice: Lying


Gaslighting - the primary mind control techniques of the Progs:
1. They tell blatant lies.
2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.
3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.
4. They wear you down over time.
5. Their actions do not match their words.
6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.
7. They know confusion weakens people.
8. They project their bad behavior onto you.
9. They try to align people against you.
10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.
11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.

In reply to by Cryptopithicus Homme

mtl4 powow Fri, 07/27/2018 - 13:14 Permalink

Notice they needed to explain to us what they believe shadow banning is and then deny it?!

That means they are most definitely admitting to doing it since we all know you can find the content when searching directly yet nothing gets pushed as content to anyone, unless your a democrat, then it's different...........that's called shadow banning.  If Trump was smart he start charging those organizations with making illegal in-kind campaign contributions, not that their stock needs any additional reasons to plummet further.  I hope silicon valley keeps going with the BS denial crap because it will cause a clear unhinging when yet another conservative wave hits the polls again soon.

In reply to by powow

PiratePiggy Free This Fri, 07/27/2018 - 12:04 Permalink

" a system of “down ranking” “shitty people”



If Jack Dorsey ran a bar, the slimeball would be watering down customer's drinks.

If Jack Dorsey ran a restaurant, he'd be spitting in customer's food

If Jack Dorsey ran ....(ZH readers - Please reply to add examples!)

In reply to by Free This

gearjammers1 macholatte Fri, 07/27/2018 - 12:55 Permalink

The lesbian on here who threatened me is always complaining about "psychos". She was actually on a thread about "gaslighting" complaining about "psychos", trying to gaslight people on the "gaslighting" thread. That lesbian has been trying to "gaslight" me. I came to the conclusion that the lesbian is a man-hater, and that she thinks all men are psychos. She just threatened someone else here recently, calling him a psycho.

In reply to by macholatte

PrivetHedge Looney Fri, 07/27/2018 - 11:19 Permalink

the best definition we found is this: deliberately making someone’s content undiscoverable to everyone except the person who posted it, unbeknownst to the original poster." -Twitter 

Their definition is deliberately too narrow.

Shadow banning is deliberately restricting the discoverability of your content, which may or may not be everyone else, usually they allow a few close friends to view it to not arouse the suspicion of the victim.

Shadow banning is widespread on FB and twitter and the act of cowardly pharisees with no respect for the first amendment, democracy or free speech. Then your comments on a large group doesn't show up in the list of comments everyone who views it sees, only your close friends see it.

In reply to by Looney

PrivetHedge Free This Fri, 07/27/2018 - 13:51 Permalink

No need to project your emotions on me, I simply see you as lost and misled by a religion of Lucifer (Judaism).

As it's purpose is to deceive; you are merely a victim, I feel the same way toward you as I do a lemming running over a cliff, or an ant crossing a highway.

May you one day study the roots of your beliefs, wake up and start helping people, rather than the Israeli way of rejoicing in conflict and destruction. Remember the word 'heaven' is derived from 'harmony', and the word 'hell' means 'isolated' or 'separated'.

In reply to by Free This