The "free speech absolutist" strikes again to silence speach he personally doesn't like.
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
659 points (98.2% liked)
News
23014 readers
6 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
He's such a hero! Imagine where we would be without him.
Honestly it would be amazing.
A lot fewer doge investors and a lot fewer people got scammed into buying crypto.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's so mortifying that I bought into the Mush hype for a few years. It's one of those "embarrassing things you did as a kid" levels of self cringe.
When he was just running Tesla and SpaceX, and generally keeping his mouth shut he seemed okay. It was around Hyperloop that he started to show his true self.
"By 'free speech,' I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law."
-- Musk Tweeted that after getting criticized for censoring Twitter in Turkey and India. So apparently if North Korea allowed Twitter, he'd happily censor away since that would be the law.
The good ol "Everything I say has super smart and deep meaning that needs to be explained everytime I make seemingly absurd, contradictory and short-sighted comments." What a deep, mysterious and nuanced fellow.
Well he was right about one thing. Humour is legal again because this is hilarious.
In order to win a libel suit it is my understanding they must prove the claims to be false. So if this goes to court they could end up proving in court that it is a matter of fact provable that Twitter has become more toxic since Musk took over. And then they would win. That would be brilliant.
That would require the researchers to be able to afford a lengthy trial, which I'm guessing they can't. Rich people do this shit to scare people out of going to trial.
Good thing there are plenty of good lawyers that would cream their pants to take up a high profile slam dunk case like this pro bono or on contingency.
The ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center have some, I'm sure they would love to participate.
Can Twitter afford it? They don't have any accountants anymore and they may be the ones who will go in the shitter against a lengthy trial. Their ad incentive program had like only 5 mil available and Musk became neutered the moment he had to pay 100 million to the disabled guy he was about to fire.
This is clearly a SLAPP lawsuit. Since civil penalties and fines don't matter to Musk it seems the only way to enforce good behavior is with criminal ones.
Elon Musk's slow transformation into Donald Trump is as disturbing as it is fascinating. Not much good at anything, but incredible at self-promotion so people think he is; obsessed with Twitter and conspiracy theories, then becoming a right-wing demagogue; refusing to pay people he owes and suing anyone who looks sideways at him. Few would have predicted this 10 years ago.
Not much good at anything, but incredible at self-promotion so people think he is
A friend of mine once made what I thought was an absolutely brilliant observation: "Self-promotion is the only skill that is consistently rewarded."
Fuck this guy. I'm embarrassed that there was a time that I thought he was alright. I hope he slips and falls on a steaming pile of dogshit.
Once upon a time he did seem to be okay (as far as billionaires can be).
Musk almost seemed philanthropic with his ventures of bringing forward the future with SpaceX and Tesla. Then almost suddenly he started to be vocal about certain politics and various bad practices came to light in how he behaved or treat his workforce.
In fact, it's only until relatively recently it seems where the ultra wealthy seemed to be quite under the radar. Bezos, for example. Before and during his divorce you never really heard much about him. He seemed pretty likable in many ways. Then suddenly that changed, the media perception shifted and these people started getting lots of publicity and they were clearly unable to curate their image any longer.
load more comments
(2 replies)
In the letter, attorney [for Twitter] Alex Spiro questioned the expertise of the researchers and accused the center of trying to harm X’s reputation. The letter also suggested, without evidence, that the center received funds from some of X’s competitors
Is this enough for a countersuit?
Then Mr Musk said: "my dad can beat up your dad!" and ran away to knock over the bicycle of one of the researchers. Then everyone got ice cream.
load more comments
(3 replies)
If the evidence around changes in Twitter content might be harmful to the business model and alarming to advertisers?
If the shoe fits, then what?
Free speech y'all
Barbra Streisand called, she wants her effect back.
It feels like the Streisand effect is negatively impacting me/everyone else in this instance
I despise the guy, but I’m tired of hearing about every stupid exploit. He’s so fabulously rich that no negative publicity can really cause reprecussions, I feel like it now just keeps him constantly in the public eye a la Trump circa 2016
This would be a reasonable take if it weren't for the fact that Twitter is, or was effectively the default platform for public discourse for most of the western world. What the Muskrat is doing to it has real, significant, and far-reaching consequences.
That may be true for the biggest and most far-reaching things he does, but we don’t need to know every daily controversy with changing the signage on a San Francisco building. It’s overload.
Every tweet he puts out with an ignorant opinion is probably not newsworthy enough to be disseminated widely; that’s actually exactly what he would want to happen.
Even dropping from 4 major Musk related outrage stories a day to a couple a week would be a much healthier discourse, without stamping out any important information like your concerned about.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The thing that most stands out to me about Musk and his ilk isn't their hate - it's their cowardice.
If they would actually own their hate, I'd have some bare modicum of respect for them. At least then it would be a principled stance. A loathsome one to be sure, but at least principled.
But they're too cowardly and weak-willed for that. They're all telling it like it is and going their own way and fuck your feelings right up until someone calls them out on it, then they instantly turn into weepy schoolgirls moaning about how picked on and persecuted they are.
It's projection. They shout about 'snowflakes' and 'freedom of speech'. Or screech about 'wokeness' and all the other nonsense.
It's only to deflect from the fact that they're the snowflakes.
Most of them are too stupid to realise that's what they're doing. They're too embarrassed to admit (often to even themselves) that they have no idea what freedom of speech actually is, or indeed any of the things are that they whine incessantly about. Utterly drowning in their cognitive dissonance.
They get whipped up into such a feverous stupour of fear that they can't take a second to stop and actually think about what they're being fed by their media rag of choice. They might actually realise that their stance doesn't actually make any sense.
From Climate Change to Brexit. From Hunter Biden to Electric Vehicles. From '15minute cities' to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Someone level headed will make a comment or raise an issue of 'hey guys, maybe we should think about doing something about x. If we don't then it's probable that it will lead to something bad'. Something even as simple as offering a policy that will actually improve a great deal of people's quality of life (including their own) with little cost. It's all met with ruddy faced rage and flying spittle.
It's absolute insanity.
I read your first paragraph too fast and read "freedom of screech". Fits as well.
It’s because, truthfully, they have no other stance except those that either make them money or headlines.
They’ll have whatever fuck principles and stances that will give them either more money or more acknowledgement for their egos.
They published those lawyers' letters, both from Muskiboi and the answer. Pretty entertaining read, actually.
Could you link those? I'd like to read them!
Looking over their concerns, I'm not sure that they have a leg to stand on. The claim they're making is that they've measured an increase in hate-related tweets (I'll take them at their word on this) and then they associate this with Musk taking over.
They present no evidence for this later claim and do not, as far as I can see, make any attempt to compare against increases in hate among other social media platforms.
Grooming, for example, is one topic they covered. But this is a topic that Republicans have been pushing increasingly as election season spins up. Musk didn't cause that, and that kind of nonsense can be found on Facebook and reddit as well.
I'm inclined to sympathize with an underdog nonprofit, but in this case I just can't see why they expected not to get pushback on such poorly grounded claims
Pure SLAPPery.
Musk will just sue, lose, appeal, lose, refile, lose and on and on until the non-profit simply run out of money.
Threaten to sue? Maybe
Remember that in the legal process, discovery uncovers all truths and communications. Depositions are the one sand trap for people like Trump and Musk. If you lie under deposition, you get prison time. That’s why they rarely if ever agree to it.
I’ll bet a lot of money no suit is filed. This is all posturing for crazies to assume X sued them and it must not be true. Threatening to sue is the new spin doctoring.
I don't think this non profit is seeking to "drive advertisers away", Twitter and musk seem to be doing a pretty good job of that on their own!
sees nonprofit researching the rise of hate on social media platforms and threatens them
Ye ol' Muskrat just gave them a data point.
One would assume it would be cheaper to perform your own study to refute their results.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Being totally against free speech as an advocate for free speech... couldn't be musk!
Not our precious Musky!
You think this is bad? This chicanery? He's done worse.
Dude is cum drunk
Because of course
Free speech absolutist
Douche Nozzle Musk. I hope his life is only one huge failure after another.
Can we eject him from.thd earth yet. Sick of this dystopian count
view more: next ›