Source: The Washington Post
Social media company Truth Social brought forward by Donald Trump has shown itself to be supportive of ‘free speech’. However, since the issues it ran into during partial launch earlier this years, the moderators have either gotten rid of or just restricted the show of posts from users. Moreover, a new investigation from one outlet called Public Citizen indicated how they brought such restrictions without specifying the reason.
Such removal or limitations of statuses also had posts based on the investigation of the US Capitol attacks, along with ones connected to Roe vs. Wade overturning. Additionally, it also placed restrictions of posts by any conservative. According to concerned authorities, how the interest on the topic develops after many were visibly removed from the platforms after speaking against Trump, or liberal thoughts.
Public Citizen’s Hunt Majer stated how the blocking of content clearly appeared in the initial moments of the study to her. While experimenting, she put up a status saying ‘abortion is healthcare,’ soon seeing it to get end up getting a shadow ban, without any specific notice to her. The post came back on as she took the issue to TikTok.
What else was blocked?
Revelations showed how posts other than Democratic policy stands, the group found posts like ones on ownership of guns to get a shadow ban. Moreover, Hunt Majer also conducted an experiment on publishing a quote including criticisms for US support to Ukraine after complaints, which she failed to do. However, according to the platforms’ policies, it does not support the action of shadow bans, promising never to take part in it.
Additionally, the site specified how it is bound to take part in certain moderations for the prevention of unwanted content, mostly doing so by means of AI. Further, human intervention can involve the reviewing items that are removed. Its acknowledgements include that of not being ‘error proof,’ and dedicated to do the right things.
However, Majer stated how the companies’ policies are clearly not in sync with its actions. She stated how despite its claims on condemning such banning, it is going on to do so anyway. She pointed out how the setting of the app is indicating that app is not exactly supportive of free speech. Hunt Majer pointed how the ones operating the eatery are not exactly capable of put a side together.
