I don’t think I’d agree with the author’s characterization of the data. The graphs don’t seem to show any obvious trends, really. If anything, the graphs show how wildly variable the virus’ impact can be even among countries with similar economic and demographic profiles.
I’ve been trying to have more 1-1 conversations with friends these days about some of the more controversial topics in the news when it comes up, basically an IRL version of a DM, and it’s been interesting to see how people’s opinions align against the Twitter opinion spectrum. About half have been much more moderate than anything I’ve seen online, but the other half actually do align with the more radical and loud voices shouting about whatever it is that’s trending on Twitter at that moment. I always thought that Twitter wasn’t really representative of what most people thought/believed but now I’m not so sure. Of course this is just based on personal anecdotes. And to be fair, all of the 1-1 conversations I’ve had have been productive and each time I’ve been able to walk away with some ideas that I haven’t had before.
Would look into different research regarding managing up, down and across and persuasion more generally. Robert Cialdini has a classic book called Influence I would highly recommend. I think at the management level you're describing, managing disagreements is often about trying to create internal alliances to advance whatever project/policies/changes you think are in the company's best interests.
It also might be that your company has grown to a point where not everyone's self-interest is aligned with the company's best interest. Would recommend Loonshots by Safi Bahcall which explores that idea quite a bit too.
Twitter is definitely allowed to do this, legally, but seems like a pretty short-sited decision. There's no way that poking the bear like this is going to lead to anything except a more highly regulated platform.