Twitter locks account of India’s largest opposition party

There are separate procedures for those... Their policies for doxxing are global. But for content illegal in a region, Twitter will hide tweets that are illegal within that jurisdiction, but not globally (cross reference handling of Nazi support messages and imagery in France and Germany... Which, as a side note, creates the funny side effect that if you grab that channel of data for a specific tweet or account, you can tell if Twitter thinks a user is a Nazi sympathizer).

Somehow I expect that even some of those who have most fully internalized the commands of their oppressors are beginning to experience a bit of cognitive dissonance from the rapid pace of oligarchic usurpation and expanding totalitarian control. At least one hopes. But there are always those who will live out their lives in the cocoon of Stockholm syndrome.

The core question as far as international law is concerned is whether or not Twitter's actions in these instances are those of a state or if it is a private actor. Twitter would say it's a private actor, but considering the close historical coordination between Twitter, the State Department, and the intelligence octopus, one would have to be somewhere between clueless, brain damaged, and a stooge to argue that Twitter is wholly a private actor and completely uncontaminated from American state pressure.

I'm not an Indian, not ethnically Indian, don't care about India, but India should accordingly treat Twitter as if it is an American state actor and seek restitution and remediation under the exact same reasoning that the United States uses to blame the Russian state for election interference among other miscellaneous "cyber" things.

We do use this exact reasoning against the Russians with even less evidence. Our economic policy of attempting to digitally dominate and interfere with foreign powers is also screwing up our diplomacy (not that American diplomacy can really get any more twisted, but still, I'm speaking in terms of the principle here). India's at an inflection point now in its own foreign policy, and it is not helpful to the American interest to have quasi-private frothing algorithmic dogs causing needless diplomatic incidents continuously for no discernable benefit to anyone but Twitter's feckless shareholders.

Is the family of the rape victim consenting to their image being used, or not? Is the picture and/or identity of the family widely broadcast in the media, or not? Is the picture portraying things in a particularly unique and politically important light (like the napalm girl picture), or not?

Edit: I see other people starting to bring in this sort of information now, but I don't think it's surprising that early comments are on the content of the article.