I have read this now in several places. The Brave browser which purports to be a champion of privacy purposefully white lists, i.e., writes in exceptions for, Twitter and Facebook. These popular sites are at the center of the concern over online service companies storing and selling user data.
While it seems that failure to block these sites was the result of scripts which when blocked break the rendering of web content from Twitter and Facebook, failure to make clear to users the accommodation allowed for these services represents a violation of trust and clarity of mission. Clearly, users were informed that blocking scripts could lead to difficulty with some sites and users could turn off blocking if this became a problem. It seems taking this position on the possibility of proper display and then failing to acknowledge that this difficulty was avoided for favored services via white listing is doubly offensive.
Update: Brave responds. The widespread criticism of Brave has generated this reply from the company.