I don't know if tweaking the algorithms can be considered censorship. The current tweaking always censors something over another thing, they have inherent bias, in a sense, and technically it's still there to find if you're looking for it.

The question of what gets pushed to the front page of some media platform is an interesting one, but I'm not sure censorship is the right mental frame. I'd like to think of it more as propaganda. It controls the narrative by choosing what to propagate and flood people with, not so much by censoring.

Another interesting dimension here too is that the previous flood of misinformation seems to also have been part of why this was specifically targeted. If you let too much misinformation go through, you're bound to start to believe everything is misinformation, and so here even the FBI and Facebook and other social media platforms thought: what if this is more misinformation, what if it's more Russian interference?

In fact, I think I read a while back this is a known tactic used by old USSR propaganda. You delegitimize real information by pushing a bunch of false info alongside it, and people can't discern truth from lie, and trust in information is lost.

It begs the question, which is worse, let the lies fly, or risk some false positive flags on the truth?

It's a tough problem all around.