The Propaganda FilesTwitter Files #10: how Twitter moderated the COVID debate
David Zweig reported that both the Trump and Biden administrations pressed Twitter on COVID content, and that Twitter labeled or removed some posts by credentialed experts that were opinion or accurate data. Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff's tweet was labeled 'Misleading.'
Both administrations pressed Twitter, and the moderation tracked public-health positions rather than a party line.
What the record shows
Zweig reported that Trump-era meetings focused on panic buying and 'runs on grocery stores,' while the Biden team's first COVID meeting request focused on 'anti-vaxxer accounts.' An internal summary said Biden officials were 'very angry' Twitter had not been more aggressive. Kulldorff's tweet was labeled 'Misleading' and replies and likes were turned off. Physician Andrew Bostom was permanently suspended; an internal audit prompted by his lawyer found only 1 of 5 strikes valid. Zweig said moderation relied on bots, contractors in places like the Philippines, and senior staff's judgment calls.
In their words
“anti-vaxxer accounts”— Biden White House meeting request topic (per Zweig) · source
“very angry”— Twitter internal summary describing Biden officials (per Zweig) · source
The pressure came from both administrations, and much of the moderation reflected official public-health guidance at the time rather than party politics. The thread is Zweig's selection from internal files, and the full set of COVID decisions was not released.
Sources
- David Zweig, Twitter Files Part 10 (Thread Reader)https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1607378386338340867.html
- Wikipedia: Twitter Fileshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Files