Or any other violence, mass killings, etc. which are allowed in the name of free speech by terrorists and deranged politicians?
How much money is he planning to lose in lawsuits?
I'm all for Elon Musk allowing total free speech for both conservatives and liberals without prejudice. But he has to be responsible and not allow incitement of violence and provably fake news. Both are extremely dangerous and can ruin people's lives. That and he has to figure out a way to purge all the bots.
shareOf course, free speech is a dangerous thing. It should be filtered and censored by benevolent billionaires, our beloved media owners, as always.
shareI enjoyed this biting sarcasm. Don’t you also love how they use the euphemism “content moderation” for censorship?
shareAnd "fact checking", that is another great one, where they can decide what is real, and what is not. The world can be a much simpler place.
shareAlso how they completely ignore that section 230 protects platforms from the very thing they're claiming Twitter would be accused of under Elon.
So long as Twitter operates as a platform, they're not held liable, the individuals are.
I wish it is all just being about profit and liability, but I think a lot of it is about narratives and control the flow of information.
Information is power. That is what media are about.
There is also "with great power comes great responsibility", but in that sentence the power comes first.
I think Musk just wants political influence, a seat at the table, a major media platform at least not losing money.
From what I heard Musk's SolarCity solar energy company lost to Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway owned traditional power generation was sort of testimony that his political influence was no where near comparing to Buffett, even now his net worth is about twice of Buffett.
One of the reasons I think was that Buffett had control over The Washington post, and a large number of other regional newspapers.
Yup. Also apparently the Keystone pipeline got nerfed because of Buffet and his railway line.
So you're absolutely right about Buffet having more political influence than Musk.
I suppose Musk might use Twitter as narrative-leverage to start edging his way into politics?
I think so. People don't pay $44 billion for "functional democracy", it would be naive to believe that narrative, and it does show Musk is more than ready for politics. For someone as smart as Musk it would be easy once honesty is out of way.
sharefc31: check out this new video on how former U.S. government officials go on the news calling for more and more massive weapons transfers and escalation of the war in Ukraine and never once mention - nor are they asked about - their current paid positions with weapons manufacturers. Pretty compelling mix of video snippets
https://youtu.be/LDqBHjDHkvw
What worries me more is also all the media outlets allowing them to promote those narratives, they clearly know what these people were going to say, these are like commercials pretending to be news.
It is like all those billionaires had few little chats in their clubs and that is what we see.
Free speech is only dangerous to dictators and totalitarian regimes. The problem is that the majority of the population is uneducated and unable to dicern truth from lies and misinformation. If the uneducated users of Twitter didn't rely on it for information, this wouldn't be an issue.
I disagree with Musk, Twitter is not the town square. It does not speak for me nor relay information to me. I have no problem with Twitter "censoring" tweets as it is their prerogative as they are not the government.
You kind of just said democracy is stupid, because majority of people are stupid and they are so easily brainwashed.
That is why we need benevolent billionaires like Musk to brainwash people the "right" way, to maintain "functioning democracy"? I think that is what Musk meant anyway.
But if democracy depends on media and media are all owned by billionaires, then are you sure there is even real democracy?
you kidding? his AI will use thw bots to mentally control the masses who are blind enough to follow twitter. they'll all stop being so stupid, so it is a win win.
shareThe problem is that the people who decide what constitutes "provably fake news" can't be trusted. This is the most glaringly obvious flaw for even good faith proponents of censorship.
shareIs this satire? Or do you believe there was an attempted insurrection of The USA government?
I am not American, and do not understand this position. I have not seen any creditable evidence of a planned insurrection of the USA government. This looked like the typical scene after a big sports game, bunch of hyped up people causing shit.
People who still call January 6th an "insurrection" suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, it's really as simple as that.
shareIt's normal for your government buildings to be smashed into by people threatening to lynch legislators who are running and hiding as police protecting them are beaten in your country at the behest of your leader who has decided to remain in power after he lost an election?
You live where?
Yes, that behavior is normal. Many countries have riots after an election. I am not sure why the security is so crappy in Washington. This was a manageable situation, very similar to a major sports event.
shareOh, but you have no problems with BLM setting governmental buildings on fire and threatening to kill everyone inside ...
shareYour deflection doesn't work.
Continue to support your cult leader's failed coup.
I don't support Trump.
It was not a coup, failed or not. Even if they successfully occupied the building for several hours or days that wouldn't have brought down the government or replace it. Stop being dense.
I'm not deflecting, I'm just pointing out the leftists' hypocrisy.
If it was a bona fide insurrection perpetrated by gun nuts, surely they would have brought their guns en masse?
shareOr do you believe there was an attempted insurrection of The USA government?
Some had guns. A man planted two bombs. A lynch mob attempting to end democracy and install a dictatorship is behavior you're defending. You would be happy living in Russia with Putin.
share
I defended nothing. It was a shameful day and they should have shot every one of those sons of bitches. But anyone who calls that an insurrection and an attempt to end democracy is either intellectually dishonest or just plain stupid.
You're in major denial. Some have already been charged with seditious conspiracy and there is a bipartisan Senate investigation going on about the failed coup.
https://apnews.com/article/stewart-rhodes-arrested-oath-keepers-jan-6-insurrection-70019e1007132e8df786aaf77215a110
I suggest you step out of your echo chamber and watch news from various sources to become more informed.
"Failed coup".. LOL "Bipartisan"... Laughing harder. Any coup on America is happening from the Dems, who are opening our borders wide open and allowing foreign influences. Of course they are attempting to charge people with more than rioting.
Me in denial? No, I'm intellectually honest. Liberals have a binary thought process. A riot is nothing less than an insurrection. Illegal aliens are nothing more than "undocumented".
That riot doesn't fit any definition of insurrection than anyone with more than a room temperature IQ would understand. It's chilly in here...
You defend the insurrection because you're a Trump cultist who supports his coup attempt.
share
There was no insurrection, and I have vehemently opposed the Capitol Rioters. They should have shot every one of them. Indeed, they acted just like the BLM and Antifa rioters. But insurrection? Again, only an idiot would believe that.
You're a racist and proven liar without a leg to stand on. Everyone here knows you're a nutjob.
shareThe Leftist elites in current control of nearly all U.S. institutions use the “insurrection” terminology because it serves a corrupt political purpose: imposing more stringent censorship and suppression of dissent. People in positions of power want Americans to believe that a real-life “insurrection” was genuinely attempted and to develop an exaggerated mythical understanding of what occurred at the Capitol. It is a tool they will use to seize additional powers — not through a “coup” — but through the vast inflation of an alleged threat, which is always how they do it.
share
They are trying for a bloodless coup. I said 20 years ago the leftists will try to suspend the Constitution. 20 years ago I was labelled a fool for saying that. Now it's on their table. If the leftists had the power to suspend the Constitution for something else, they would do it.
" Or do you believe there was an attempted insurrection of The USA government? "
There was absolutely an attempt. It was laughable and had no chance of succeeding, but they tried.
If the words "march" and "protest peacefully" is incitement, then BLM has an entire summer to answer for, lol
shareWas Jack Dorsey and liberal owners of Twitter liable after BLM supporter's literal calls for the death of White people cause THREE BLM inspired terrorist attacks (Dallas, Christmas parade attack and New York Subway)?
shareWhy do you capitalize the first letter of each word in the subject line? Is it the title to your new album or something?
shareTitles should be capitalized. It's a thread title, n'est-ce pas?
shareI'd consider it a subject line but whatever. I'm sure you're well invested into whatever it is that you think.
shareYou're rather funny. It literally says "Thread Title" under "add new post":
https://moviechat.org/nm1907769/Elon-Musk
I may move to all caps in the title if it'll annoy you more.
let's ban paper and pencils too. they could be used for something
shareTrump didn't incite anything.
There was no "insurrection".
The only violent death was of an unarmed woman who was shot by a cop. A few other people died of natural causes.