"Dominion came to us on Monday, March 9, 2021, and demanded we take the post down. We at first obliged but then after some consideration decided to eliminate any mention of Dominion Voting Systems in the article and repost it."
I find it suspicious that Gateway Pundit did not show the actual Dominion letter requesting the takedown with any detail it may contain. The time series data mined from Edison Research (via the NYT JSON queries) and shared across the net is flawed by low precision. It is possible that the letter pointed this out.
Why would they even "at first oblige" unless there is there is more to the story? Perhaps the Dominion letter provided facts that would cast doubt on the whole approach.
I find it suspicious that Gateway Pundit did not show the actual Dominion letter requesting the takedown with any detail it may contain. The time series data mined from Edison Research (via the NYT JSON queries) and shared across the net is flawed by low precision. It is possible that the letter pointed this out.
Why would they even "at first oblige" unless there is there is more to the story? Perhaps the Dominion letter provided facts that would cast doubt on the whole approach.