Twitter just keeps digging it’s own grave. Last week, they claimed they weren’t shadow banning conservatives by admitting they shadow ban conservatives, shortly before POTUS himself slammed the social media network for their biased practices.

Like Facebook and Google, Twitter seems to be thin-spined and unwilling to make their own judgment call on how best to monitor content on their network, opting instead to try to please both censored conservatives and loud obnoxious leftists who think that literally everything is hate speech.

So when Twitter announced they were bringing in some hoity-toity academics to help “combat bias”, it came as no surprise that these academics were totally and completely biased.

Trending: Confirmed: Previously Arrested BLM Rioter Dressed In Pro-Trump Gear to Storm Capitol

The Daily Caller has the story:

take our poll - story continues below

Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?

• Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?  

• Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?*
  • Yes
  • No
• Email*
• Name
  This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Twitter announced Monday it would bring in a group of academics to combat bias on the platform, but many of them are openly anti-Trump and anti-conservative.

In this potential conflict of interest, the academics’ previous tweets have resurfaced, calling for “vigilance” against Trump policies, referring to Trump supporters as boot-lickers, accusing Trump of having small hands and saying reasonable Americans would flee the country if Trump won the election, Fox News reported.

These statements contrast sharply with Twitter’s mission of “serving the public conversation and working to increase the collective health, openness, and civility of the dialogue on our service,” as outlined in its Monday post, “Measuring healthy conversation.”

“We want everyone’s experience on Twitter to be free of abuse, harassment and other types of behaviors that can detract or distort from the public conversation,” she added.

Here are some examples of these “anti-bias” scholars’ open bias:

Trump looks cruelty in the face and demands more of it. Time's cover captures that well. https://t.co/E3VJWudELd. The executive order is not a solution. Constant vigilance is still needed.

— Jenny Stromer-Galley (@profjsg) June 21, 2018

https://twitter.com/RebekahKTromble/status/831489299027808256

https://twitter.com/RebekahKTromble/status/892100110099914752

https://twitter.com/RebekahKTromble/status/897792260821090304

https://twitter.com/patyrossini/status/756313474054094848

Trump's proposed budget includes cutting Corporation for Public Broadcasting — the best source for news out there. Of course. #smallhands

— Jenny Stromer-Galley (@profjsg) March 16, 2017

I’d say that, based on these tweets, not only can we not trust these academics to help combat bias in Twitter’s business practices, but we can’t even trust them to reasonably cope with reality.