That's fair, "vendetta" is too strong of a word. "Personal bias" is better-suited. It's just hard to read a post calling them "internet vampires" and still assume a neutral author.
But Twitter has objectively proven themselves to be "celebrity vampires" by selectively applying different sets of rules to celebrities than to common people.
For example, it is against Twitter's official rules (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules) for a user to use their platform to say hateful or racist things, and they regularly ban people for violating those conditions, but they they regularly allow famous people (like the President of the USA) to get away with violating many of those rules.
Why does Twitter let Trump (and many other famous people) get away with breaking the rules? Because Twitter directly benefits from the viewers and the outrage.
Acknowledging that fact (and yes, it is a provable fact) hardly means someone has a personal vendetta against Twitter.
