The New Yorker published a story on Wednesday that looks at how the Trump administration is attempting to control what people see on Twitter.

The story is a very important one, but the most significant thing that the story touches on is the rise of what I call the ‘reinventing Twitter.’

And it’s about one thing: What it is that people want to see.

It’s about what people want their friends and relatives and colleagues to see when they tweet about their lives and their experiences, their work and their lives.

And it concerns the future of social media and what it means for how we interact with the world.

The key idea here is that if we want to build something that’s truly meaningful and meaningful for people, we need to understand what it is people want, not just what they want to tweet about.

The NYT is one of the best-known media outlets in the world, and has a long history of covering social media.

Its reporting on social media has been influential in shaping policy and policy-making around the world over the past 20 years.

The article that we have today is not the first article to highlight how the government has been trying to control how people interact with Twitter.

In fact, I think the most notable recent case of this kind of government meddling on social networking comes from the 2016 election, when the Trump White House attempted to suppress the number of people who had Twitter accounts.

The goal was to limit the impact of the hashtag #DeleteYourAccount and other #DeleteHillary messages, and to limit what users saw in the first place.

The goal was not just to shut down accounts that were actually engaged in politics or social justice work.

The Trump administration was also seeking to limit access to the information on Twitter that would give it an advantage in the 2020 election.

This is a central element of the New York Post story, which details how a few days before the election, the White House issued a directive that made it more difficult for people to use the company’s platform for political speech and political activism.

Twitter had a lot of tools at its disposal to limit political speech, but these tools weren’t always effective.

And in some cases, they were used for things that they shouldn’t be used for.

Twitter is now taking steps to address this.

The company is making a concerted effort to improve its tools to help users avoid abuse, to prevent abuse, and so on.

The problem is that these are things that Twitter itself has been working on for years.

They’ve always tried to make it as easy as possible for users to use its service for political and social speech.

The way that Twitter handles abuse and harassment is to make sure that people who do abuse people on Twitter don’t get paid.

That means the companies that have the tools and know how to manage abuse and abuse, they’re the ones that are going to be able to stop people from using these tools.

And what that means is that in 2018, Twitter was able to shut out more than 30,000 people who were engaging in political activity, and in 2019 it was able a bit more, shutting out more people who wanted to engage in political and political-activist work.

And this is how you get this kind the political power that you need to use these tools, but you also have to make them easy to abuse.

So this is what happens.

It makes it much easier for people who are trying to engage with Twitter, but they don’t want to do that, to engage without being targeted.

This is a really important problem.

If Twitter was making it easy for people with a political agenda to tweet in an easy-to-use, easy-for-people way, then why do people have to have a social media platform at all?

Why is this an issue?

Because when you’re a citizen, when you have a voice, you’re supposed to have the right to say what you want to say, to speak your mind.

And you shouldn’t have to be afraid of being harassed or bullied for doing that.

But Twitter’s rules are set to make that impossible for millions of users.

The reason this is an issue is because it means that Twitter is making it harder for the people who have the ability to participate in political discourse, the people in the digital space who are most likely to engage politically, to do so.

That’s an important problem because it is what’s creating the space that we see today in so much of the United States.

This space has never been about political engagement.

It has always been about entertainment.

It was never about making money.

It is about making a space where people can be themselves.

And that’s why it’s important to make the space a place where people feel free to do the things that make them happy.