November 18, 20195 min read, 1045 words
Published: November 18, 2019 | 5 min read, 1045 words
CRITIC REVIEWS
Lack of Reliable Sources
November 23, 2019
An act of literary conjuring camouflaged as investigative journalism. In actuality though, as is almost always the case with the conspiratorially minded, rife with paranoia in style and substance, such as there is. The piece consists primarily of conjectural foreplay, ephemeral as the ether. It would serve the prospective reader well to also take note of the outlandish and presumptive nature of the proffered conclusion. Not a worthwhile read.
November 23, 2019
PUBLIC REVIEWS
Lack of Reliable Sources
November 19, 2019
A fabrication to rival 9-11 conspiracies, except with more details and less evidence to push the fallacy.
November 19, 2019
Political Agenda
November 18, 2019
Trying to push a narrative that does not exist. This is an Op Ed with nary a single source.
November 18, 2019
Lack of Reliable Sources
November 23, 2019
This article is a total fabrication lacking in credible sources. This type of article is part of the disinformation wave across the internet.
November 23, 2019
Sensational
November 19, 2019
My issue with this article is with the sensationalism and speculation at the beginning where it references Twitter hiring a "senior editorial executive for Europe, the Middle East and Africa is an active officer in the British Army’s 77th Brigade, a unit dedicated to online warfare and psychological operations." To me, it's more likely that Twitter hired this individual to help secure Twitter and keep disinformation campaigns off of the platform. It's the same as a company hiring a professional hacker. THey're not doing it so the hacker can compromise their system, they're doing it so the hacker can use his or her blackhat skills to test the integrity of the platform.
November 19, 2019