Musk says "Go f**k yourselves" to advertisers

[Heloin]

Yeah but supporting shitty people in the blind hope that they'll not be shitty this time, is profoundly naïve.

I have no reason to believe he is going to promote free speech any less that twitter currently does.

Literally anything he has ever done is reason to believe otherwise.

[Ifreann]

Musk tried to have a whistleblower killed by the police. So I guess he is the perfect champion of American free speech.

Sometimes shitty people do good things.

Sometimes people say they care about free speech, but really they just want free speech for themselves and no rights at all for anyone who might criticise them.

[Dogmeat]

Yeah but supporting shitty people in the blind hope that they'll not be shitty this time, is profoundly naïve.

I have no reason to believe he is going to promote free speech any less that twitter currently does.

Right... because if a heartless corporation didn't promote free speech, surely a narcissistic corporate megalomaniac will?

[Ethel mermania]

Sad it takes a foreigner to champion free speech for Americans.

Good for Musk

Free speech champion Elon Musk makes about as much sense as saying human rights advocate Idi Amin.

I dont agree at all. I think he will improve twiters support of free speech which they currently do not do.

The digital world has become the public square and needs to be treated and regulated as such. Twitter and face book interfered with the 2020 election by suppressing news ( yes Biden laptop), personally I dont think it would have changed the election, Trump lost for the same reasons Clinton lost in 2016. However they materially tried to change the election and should be held accountable for that.

Public speech, unless it calls for incitement should not be suppressed.

[Page]

Our speech was, is, and will be controlled by billionaires. Nothing fundamentally changes.

[Ifreann]

Free speech champion Elon Musk makes about as much sense as saying human rights advocate Idi Amin.

I dont agree at all. I think he will improve twiters support of free speech...

Can't imagine why you would think that.

[Ethel mermania]

I have no reason to believe he is going to promote free speech any less that twitter currently does.

Right... because if a heartless corporation didn't promote free speech, surely a narcissistic corporate megalomaniac will?

He can't do any worse than it is now.

[Hrvada]

I mean, I completely support Musk acquiring Twitter. Although there really is no evidence to show free speech will suddenly be protected once he takes over, the current oligarchs who own Twitter have shown time and time again that they don't support free speech. What do we have to lose if this happens?

[Dogmeat]

Right... because if a heartless corporation didn't promote free speech, surely a narcissistic corporate megalomaniac will?

He can't do any worse than it is now.

Yes he can. That's stupid.

[Ifreann]

I mean, I completely support Musk acquiring Twitter. Although there really is no evidence to show free speech will suddenly be protected once he takes over, the current oligarchs who own Twitter have shown time and time again that they don't support free speech. What do we have to lose if this happens?

The ability to mock Elon Musk on Twitter.

[Ethel mermania]

He can't do any worse than it is now.

Yes he can. That's stupid.

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his companies and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

[Heloin]

Free speech champion Elon Musk makes about as much sense as saying human rights advocate Idi Amin.

I dont agree at all. I think he will improve twiters support of free speech which they currently do not do.

The digital world has become the public square and needs to be treated and regulated as such. Twitter and face book interfered with the 2020 election by suppressing news ( yes Biden laptop), personally I dont think it would have changed the election, Trump lost for the same reasons Clinton lost in 2016. However they materially tried to change the election and should be held accountable for that.

Public speech, unless it calls for incitement should not be suppressed.

The argument you are making is the argument in defense of Facebooks policy of inaction towards deliberate disinformation that allowed the site to be used to plan and justify a genocide in Burma. Musk will not make the site better or more free, at best nothing changes. If he gets the free speech he wants he will allow for the continued spread of disinformation that is currently being used in the US by conservatives to abuse children. At worst he use the website to silence his critics. If you think for a second that a billionaire oligarch taking control of a major media platform is good then I have a bridge to sell you.

[Archinstinct]

It surprises me that anyone would want to buy Twitter. It represents some of the worst aspects of the 21st century; its shallowness, wokeness, and disconnected mass idiocy.

I can't think of a single good reason to buy it besides shutting it down. What is Elon's game here and why does he want such a monstrosity attached to his name, reputation and legacy?

Often Twitter is where direct sources and news first appear. It's the largest website for spreading news, outside of possibly tiktok? The problem and a large reason he's buying twitter (besides the SEC thing) is the website's moderation practices. Particularly russian shills dominating it while ukrainian journalists have their accounts suspended. This alone has people screaming at him to buy twitter so the policy is changed to stop that bullshit. Because screaming at the twitter board isn't working, but elon musk is willing and able to do it.

[Heloin]

Yes he can. That's stupid.

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his comoanies, and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

So you oppose free speech.

[Ethel mermania]

I dont agree at all. I think he will improve twiters support of free speech which they currently do not do.

The digital world has become the public square and needs to be treated and regulated as such. Twitter and face book interfered with the 2020 election by suppressing news ( yes Biden laptop), personally I dont think it would have changed the election, Trump lost for the same reasons Clinton lost in 2016. However they materially tried to change the election and should be held accountable for that.

Public speech, unless it calls for incitement should not be suppressed.

The argument you are making is the argument in defense of Facebooks policy of inaction towards deliberate disinformation that allowed the site to be used to plan and justify a genocide in Burma. Musk will not make the site better or more free, at best nothing changes. If he gets the free speech he wants he will allow for the continued spread of disinformation that is currently being used in the US by conservatives to abuse children. At worst he use the website to silence his critics. If you think for a second that a billionaire oligarch taking control of a major media platform is good then I have a bridge to sell you.

I am putting tolls on that bridge as we speak.

[Dogmeat]

Yes he can. That's stupid.

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his companies and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

Why would you think he wouldn't interfere in elections?

[Ifreann]

Yes he can. That's stupid.

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his companies and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

Dude's a billionaire, of course he interferes in elections.

[Picairn]

I dont agree at all. I think he will improve twiters support of free speech which they currently do not do.

Musk and his company once spread false rumors about Martin Tripp being a homicidal shooter and ordered investigators to spy on his texts just because the poor guy leaked data about Tesla's waste of money. https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/1/2175 ... ing-amount

Yeah I think free speech advocate Elon Musk makes as much sense as freedom-loving Joseph Stalin.

[Ethel mermania]

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his comoanies, and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

So you oppose free speech.

Twitter does not support free speech now. Honestly I would prefer regulation handle the issue, but since neither the democratic or republican parties support free speech in this country, I will take any improvements I can get

[Ethel mermania]

If he cuts off people from mocking him and his companies and doesn't interfere with elections, its a positive.

Why would you think he wouldn't interfere in elections?

They already do now, with him I have a chance they will stop. With current ownership there will be no change

[Grinning Dragon]

I'm all for it, the amount of real and imagined tears over something so inconsequential to human life, has been popcorn worthy.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Sometimes shitty people do good things.

Yeah but supporting shitty people in the blind hope that they'll not be shitty this time, is profoundly naïve.

That is a hallmark of right-libertarianism. Giving everything to shitty people and believing the world would become a better place as a result.

[Heloin]

So you oppose free speech.

Twitter does not support free speech now. Honestly I would prefer regulation handle the issue, but since neither the democratic or republican parties support free speech in this country, I will take any improvements I can get

The oligarch who spreads false rumors about people being murders and calls people pedos for thinking he’s an idiot will not raise the bar of “free speech”. There is no reason to think he would.

[Picairn]

I'm all for it, the amount of real and imagined tears over something so inconsequential to human life, has been popcorn worthy.

I don't think anybody in this thread has been crying about it. In any case such a deal to buy one of the Internet's major platforms merits discussion.

[Ifreann]

Why would you think he wouldn't interfere in elections?

They already do now, with him I have a chance they will stop. With current ownership there will be no change

All of Musk's businesses depend hugely on favourable regulatory environments. If anything, he has more reason to interfere in elections than the current owners of the bird site.