But Twitter, and social media, is causing the problem to begin with.

Twitter, like every major social media platform, shows people consenting opinions, because people like that. But because people factionalize naturally, of course, this means that you tend to get drawn into a highly polarized set of views.

Because you have to be polarized, but there is only one reality, one side or the other is going to tend to be wrong, factually. But because each side has been invited into its own bubble (eagerly accepted), they can't easily tell when they're the wrong side.

For instance, the left (for a change) shared an absolutely mindboggling amount of misinformation about the Rittenhouse case. The right was far more on-target. The left couldn't afford to be more on-target because that would be betraying their side in their tribal conflict with the right.

It's exactly the same mechanic, catching people the same way, oriented with the polarity of misinformation pointing left instead of right. Mostly it was rightward, due in part to a long history of the right taking advantage of its greater valuation of authority to embolden it to use motivating lies (valuing authority both makes lies less likely to be caught and more likely to be forgiven/rationalized), but the core problem is the social media mechanic.

So, how do you fix it? Leave the mechanic alone and start whacking one side when they fall afoul of it? That just makes that side feel persecuted, reducing their self-examination in response which...makes them even more likely to believe lies.

Good show, Twitter! This is exactly what we need!

So, no, I think merely the fact that Twitter has censured one side 4x more than the other is a huge problem. If the 4x more was like 0.1% vs. 0.4%, sure, no big deal. But it's like 5% vs 20% who were suspended (?!?!) in a study of politically active Twitter users: https://psyarxiv.com/ay9q5.