> Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.
> Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.
> Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.
> Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.
I'm at a bit of a loss to guess which of those might be triggering. But then, I agree with them. (Disclosure: I work for Mozilla too, so yeah, I'm biased. I'm a long way from the relevant policy discussions, though.)
I've always had mixed feelings about that article. The whole "deplatforming" thing is kind of a red herring. The article seems to approve of deplatforming, which is something I'm generally not comfortable with, but it isn't actually about deplatforming at all. I suspect that's the part that triggers reactions, for reasons that I sympathize with even though I don't think they apply to the particular case in question.