Thats a terribly named, click-baity title (though the post itself is good, and already discussed on HN) Why click-baity? The word "Twitter storm" gives the impression people are getting angry and offended (which is what we usually see on Twitter, which is why I quit 5-6 years ago and never miss it). But the "storm" in this case is people enjoying his article, which is not what I got from the title.
Not only that, the 1st paragrapph also mentions:
> But he ended up sparking a Twitter storm, causing a debate about how to build a fairer country along the way.
And yet the article never mentions any of those tweets or even summarises them. It literally just recounts his tweets with his photos.