Okay, there's a difference between:
"state funded media"
and
"state sponsored media"
This is an important distinction. One implies control, the other implies only monetary support. It's the difference between Fox "news" and PBS. Fox "news" is republican sponsored media, PBS is federally funded media. spot the difference?
As a side note, while PBS doesn't handle the news, Fox doesn't really either. It's all "opinion", according to fox news themselves.
anywho, to the point, by not bothering to distinguish, twitter as a company is being unnecessarily political.
I don't understand how you arrive to that nuance. Can't there be scenarios where state funded media is more accessible to the public than state sponsored media, and vice versa?
All of the above have incentive to get involved with politics for their own interests. Politicians on twitter seemed a bit dystopian to me when that started happening.