Even more so when that person later loudly proclaims that they never made such a request, even when provided with written proof.
I can of course not say whether the people currently working at Twitter did warn that the recent measures could have such major side effects, but I would not be surprised in the slightest, considering their leadership's mode of operation.
Even as someone who very much detests what Twitter has become over the last few months and in fact did not like Twitter before the acquisition, partly due to short format making nuance impossible, but mostly for the effect Tweets easy embeddability had on reporting (3 Tweets from random people should not serve as the main basis for an article in my opinion), I must say, I feel very sorry for the people forced to work at that company under that management.
This is something I don't get. They say that Twitter is now blocking embeds and I've seen an author respond by... including a screenshot of a tweet in their piece.
Except that's obviously better than embedding a tweet in the first place. It's better in every possible way. It's easier to write your article with an included image that you provide than to hotlink content from some other website. And when the tweet vanishes into the mists of history, your captured image of it will still be around, illustrating your article the way you were hoping the embedded tweet would do. There are so many articles out there with dead embedded tweets illustrating... something.
So, all that said... what was the effect that embeddability had on reporting? Why hasn't it been screenshots the whole time? What did easy embeddability enable that wasn't just as easy anyway?