I don't see the problem. Anyone who doesn't like Elon as Twitter CEO is free to set up their own platform. And if Elon decides to buy that, then they are free to set up another one.
Tweet something negative about Musk and let me know how that goes for you.
You are projecting the establishment mentality onto Musk
I don't pretend to understand the vagaries of the US political system but can someone please explain to me how someone who has described themselves as "moderate" and "socially liberal" is a bad thing for Democrats (as opined by OP)?
Genuinely curious what I'm missing.
Musk says he is pro free speech.
Twitter has been part of the censorship machine
Musk is as free speech as I am an olympian.
He's all talk but then punishes his employees, etc.
Musk is a bit late, isn't he? Some people say that Trump's truthsocial.com is going to bury Twitter. It's going to be HUGE! I'd give Twitter maybe another two weeks.
Twitter will be radically different in a few years. I expect that Musk will want to turn it into a full-fledged competitor for Meta/Facebook. The short quip/headline format will give way to a full social media experience with advertising and editorial content. Musk has to take it in this direction to justify the money that he is spending. To get enough users, content, and engagement, he will be forced to greatly moderate Twitter to keep enough people using it.
In the short-term, enjoy that brief free speech period.
How does censorship and banning users help grow a platform?
Money grows the platform. Advertisers run a way from no content guardrails.
Good. Maybe I'll re-join. Twitter has been totally incompetent technologically. Never seen a popular website with so many bugs and obvious missing features. The bot problem could be solved. Before Elon stepped in they were trading below their IPO price from 9 years ago while every other tech stock went up 10x. I bet he saw an easy money-making opportunity to turn it around and sell it for multiple times today's price in a few years.
I was about to post this, but you beat me to it. :)
Elon Musk didn't become the richest man on Earth by making bad financial decisions. This is a money making opportunity for him. He saw a chance to buy low, and he took the opportunity, nothing more.. nothing less. He also probably thought that 35% of US voters are Trump's base, who are angry that he was banned. So he sees a potential audience to grow the user base. His challenge is going after this market, while maintaining the rest of the platform. At the very least, you can't say he's "faint-hearted" with taking on this challenge.
I don't pretend to understand the vagaries of the US political system but can someone please explain to me how someone who has described themselves as "moderate" and "socially liberal" is a bad thing for Democrats (as opined by OP)?
Genuinely curious what I'm missing.
In short: free speech and censorship on social media (in this case, twitter) and conservatives feeling like they are disproportionately targeted (e.g. the story about Hunter Biden's laptop being deemed disinformation without any proof of that, which is now accepted as being fact).
Musk has proclaimed himself a "free speech absolutist" and criticized Twitter on some topics, so conservatives feel like Twitter will be more transparent and equitable in terms of free speech vs censorship for conservatives and liberals.
Twitter has been run by the woke cultural Marxist globalist elites who as the oligarchs of tech, feel compelled to shove their agenda down everyone's throats with cancel culture. Elon is making a course correction in cultural dialog.
What really drives the lizard brain of those against free speech is the specter of a large orange celestial object returning to the platform. As one who dislikes Trump and never has voted for him, I will be glad to see the bald patches of those re-afflicted with Marxist alopecia once he returns and they begin to tear their out again.
I don't see the problem. Anyone who doesn't like Elon as Twitter CEO is free to set up their own platform. And if Elon decides to buy that, then they are free to set up another one.
Tweet something negative about Musk and let me know how that goes for you.
People do that 24/7/365 and nothing happens to them.
Can someone explain why a billionaire buying Twitter from another billionaire so he can compete with other billionaires in the media industry, is a victory for speech?
Musk has said he prefers timeouts to bans, but also indicated he wants account verification. Why is free speech dependent on the predisposition of the new 'king' and his interpretation of it?
Good. Maybe I'll re-join. Twitter has been totally incompetent technologically. Never seen a popular website with so many bugs and obvious missing features. The bot problem could be solved. Before Elon stepped in they were trading below their IPO price from 9 years ago while every other tech stock went up 10x. I bet he saw an easy money-making opportunity to turn it around and sell it for multiple times today's price in a few years.
I was about to post this, but you beat me to it. :)
Elon Musk didn't become the richest man on Earth by making bad financial decisions. This is a money making opportunity for him. He saw a chance to buy low, and he took the opportunity, nothing more.. nothing less. He also probably thought that 35% of US voters are Trump's base, who are angry that he was banned. So he sees a potential audience to grow the user base. His challenge is going after this market, while maintaining the rest of the platform. At the very least, you can't say he's "faint-hearted" with taking on this challenge.
I don't believe that Musk has made his mega billions by buying and selling companies. His track record in this area is sparse at best.
I for one am really looking forward to Donald Trump and his associates back on Twitter. He brought an excitement to the platform that it currently lacks. Mostly it is liberals attacking MTG for mispelling "martial" or attacking someone for trying to alert Mark Meadows about ways to contest the results of an election in which voting methods were significantly different than in previous contests.
Musk has more than enough money. Apparently, he doesn't even own a house, at least that is what was reported recently. I don't think he has a mega yacht like Bezos.
He does care about free speech, and I think he is looking to improve what is probably the greatest medium to provide news today.
A little over a year ago, if you said the vaccine doesn't help the spread of COVID, it would be censored. If you said cloth masks don't work well, you would be censored. If you said anything about Hunter Biden's laptop, you would be censored. Even the moderate left, like Bill Maher acknowledges this shift in censorship.
I'm all for fact checking, but the tech fact checking has been extremely one sided. We need true discussion of topics that people don't completely agree upon. It's a difficult job to weed out hate speech and deliberate disinformation, but Twitter went completely overboard.
Of course, Musk is looking to make a positive return on his money as well. He seems like a liberal leaning person, but extremely intelligent and sees the danger of the far left pushing their agenda through a narrow group of options of social media.
Can someone explain why a billionaire buying Twitter from another billionaire so he can compete with other billionaires in the media industry, is a victory for speech?
Musk has said he prefers timeouts to bans, but also indicated he wants account verification. Why is free speech dependent on the predisposition of the new 'king' and his interpretation of it?
Haha, all of a sudden woke Marxists object to billionaires controlling social media.
Musk has more than enough money. Apparently, he doesn't even own a house, at least that is what was reported recently. I don't think he has a mega yacht like Bezos.
He does care about free speech, and I think he is looking to improve what is probably the greatest medium to provide news today.
A little over a year ago, if you said the vaccine doesn't help the spread of COVID, it would be censored. If you said cloth masks don't work well, you would be censored. If you said anything about Hunter Biden's laptop, you would be censored. Even the moderate left, like Bill Maher acknowledges this shift in censorship.
I'm all for fact checking, but the tech fact checking has been extremely one sided. We need true discussion of topics that people don't completely agree upon. It's a difficult job to weed out hate speech and deliberate disinformation, but Twitter went completely overboard.
Of course, Musk is looking to make a positive return on his money as well. He seems like a liberal leaning person, but extremely intelligent and sees the danger of the far left pushing their agenda through a narrow group of options of social media.
I mostly agree with what you said... I don't think Twitter should be the arbiter of "truth". But I also don't think Twitter should be anyone's major source of information. When the vaccine were released, plenty of us in the medical field said we didn't know if it stops spread. Here's what the Cleveland Clinic said, in August of 2021, in big bold letters, even before the variants.
"Yes, you can still transmit COVID-19 to others even if you are vaccinated"
Believe me, I saw how politicians talked about the vaccine, too... I'm well aware of the fact they full of it, and either said the vaccine was a magical silver bullet, or absolute poison).
I was about to post this, but you beat me to it. :)
Elon Musk didn't become the richest man on Earth by making bad financial decisions. This is a money making opportunity for him. He saw a chance to buy low, and he took the opportunity, nothing more.. nothing less. He also probably thought that 35% of US voters are Trump's base, who are angry that he was banned. So he sees a potential audience to grow the user base. His challenge is going after this market, while maintaining the rest of the platform. At the very least, you can't say he's "faint-hearted" with taking on this challenge.
I don't believe that Musk has made his mega billions by buying and selling companies. His track record in this area is sparse at best.
He became a billionaire by selling PayPal to eBay. That was his first success, I believe.
Since then, his money is mostly tied to the stock prices of his companies. You're right in that I don't think he's sold any companies outright since PayPal, but he has sold (and bought back) plenty of shares / stock.
