I agree with you that the government absolutely shouldn't be involved.
I don’t think it needs to be, but I’ll put it this way. Twitter has outsized importance in public conversation and opinion. Twitter is also enforcing values that I completely disagree with. So any potential changes to the way Twitter does business are welcomed by me personally. I generally do support free speech for public conversations, and I would certainly prefer Twitter move towards a more free speech model over their current enforcement system.
That's cute, but doesn't explain what you think needed to happen on twitter that didn't.
Well that’s a problem from the platform but alas Bill Clinton passed a 1990s law starting that the internet holders and their platforms are not accounted for whatever happens there. The internet evolved, the bill did not, it was manipulated and even used as a weapon!
The government is choosing to use Twitter. Twitter only has as much social influence as we allow them to. Stop using Twitter, stop clicking on Twitter links. Don't reward them for behavior you don't like.
I don't want companies to be forced to become arbiters of rights guaranteed to me by the constitution. The 1st amendment only guarantees me that the government shall not pass laws infringing on those rights, it says nothing of businesses. If we to want mandate companies to uphold those causes, then we need new amendments.
I’m not arguing any government action here. I’m arguing that if Elon Musk wants to assert his considerable influence in a way that I agree with, I am happy about it.
The problem with not invoking the government is that 'free speech' exists only from the hand of government. Whether I want to allow certain speech in my home, for example, is not a violation of anyone's 'free speech'. Likewise, I can't go into a Wal-Mart and start screaming obscenities. Wal-Mart can kick me out and my 'free speech' has not be violated. Same goes for Twitter, Facebook, NeoGaf, etc.
Maiden Voyage
Does have a perfectly reasonable response by saying it's not free speech in fairness when the company is private and pointing out that it is used by governments says more about who they target (the userbase) then anything./cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13182415/1035226128.jpg.jpg)
www.theverge.com
I'd love to get to the point where we can discuss these topics again without having to call everyone we disagree with woke or a nazi. Differing opinions are a major part of why the US such a great place. It's shame we no longer tolerate even the slightest differences of opinion, no matter the topic.
Elon is laughing all the way to the bank, he has also used his following to preach some incredibly dumb shit to on Twitter. Pump and dump stock using it etc. He got in trouble doing that and was suspended from the Telsa board for doing it;
Elon Musk forced to step down as chairman of Tesla, remains CEO
Musk settles with the SEC just two days after being charged
He has enough money to do this shit and get away with it. Doesn't make it right, his own Tweets that have been posted can rise a share price. It's a power move.
He knows what he's doing but saying he's for free speech when he only means for him is kinda silly. Not saying I disagree with your post but that's a utopian world-view. He has used Twitter to his own advantage too many times. He has his fans, I get it. I think he's just a smart-rich lunatic but I rarely look at Twitter unless someone posts a link.
Hard to hate the but with that much power, well ... he's made it obvious his intentions. He's not doing it for humanity.
Employees hijacking the company is equally as dumb. Just look at the employees of Disney, Netflix, Spotify, etc using the company as their platform.
I think it's less the employees and more the customer base, tbh. Boycotting used to be more challenging to get the voice out there. With social media any idiot can present only the points that support their case and be echoed. We give entirely too much weight to the engagement metrics on social media, especially as it's been shown that those metrics can be easily manipulated.
More than anywhere else? It's not even the second largest social media website. Hell it isn't even the third most popular. Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit all have more daily activity and traffic than Twitter does. Calling it "the public square" is ridiculous. It's a private platform that is entitled to impose it's own ToS. If you want to use it then just follow the rules. If you break them you get suspended or banned. That's not a free speech issue. Also the narrative that Twitter only allows one viewpoint or bans everyone of a certain political opinion is also nonsense.
That’s a nice idea in theory, but we know it won’t work in practice. Let’s look at how many times people have said they’ll boycott Facebook because of Zuckerberg. Nearly two decades since launch, and Facebook - sorry, Meta - is still going strong. The same thing happens with Twitter. Toxic social media is here to stay.
The format of Twitter makes it more of a public square than a site like Instagram or Reddit. Reddit is composed of a bunch of subcommunities, and IG is not for discussion but posting photos. Regardless, your point would be all well and good if they enforced rules evenly. They do not. You can get suspended for saying a man is not a woman, but you can make death threats on there and organize violence with impunity depending on your leanings.
I would take that talking point more seriously if I didn't have first hand experience reporting posts like that and getting real time responses from Twitter when they act on my reports. I've seen posts get removed and accounts suspended for the behavior that you're talking about. The fact that some stuff slips through the cracks is not proof of a rigged system especially considering that I have seen many of the hateful posts that you're talking about insulting transgender people and railing against lgbtq rights stay up and go unpunished. I could post specific examples of this from major pundits and politicians in recent weeks, but I'm afraid that would get a ban because it would be coming from political sources.
Yes, it is unfortunate that people cannot divorce from social media. It's basically a drug addiction. I could see social media becoming like the tobacco industry eventually as we learn more about the harm it does to society. Until that day, at the very least, you won't catch me on any social media accounts.
I think if people make a big enough stink then Twitter will suspend anybody. But I've seen smaller accounts being banned for really small things that most people would not find offensive. Every time I login to that cesspool I see someone calling for the murdering of "TERFs."
I think we mostly agree. Because I know Twitter is poorly moderated so we definitely agree on that. I think we just disagree on the specifics.
I think platforms should be able to enforce their own rules. At the same time, when a rule is vague like “no hate speech” and making a joke of some sort counts as “hate speech” or saying something like “men can’t get pregnant” is considered hate, well then the question becomes what is hate and what isn’t. At that points it’s just whatever Twitter considers hate, or maybe not even Twitter but some rogue staffer who was butt hurt by a certain post.
Like what exactly?
Already covered it. See my posts in the thread.
I accidentally the whole thing.
If it results in something I consider positive, I don’t really care about his motives or personal benefit. Of course, that remains to be seen. It may be a cynical pump and dump for him, in which case I will be mildly disappointed. But if it turns the company into less of an ideologically possessed nightmare, whether Musk makes money in the process is irrelevant to me.
Elon is laughing all the way to the bank, he has also used his following to preach some incredibly dumb shit to on Twitter. Pump and dump stock using it etc. He got in trouble doing that and was suspended from the Telsa board for doing it;
Elon Musk forced to step down as chairman of Tesla, remains CEO
Musk settles with the SEC just two days after being charged
He has enough money to do this shit and get away with it. Doesn't make it right, his own Tweets that have been posted can rise a share price. It's a power move.
He knows what he's doing but saying he's for free speech when he only means for him is kinda silly. Not saying I disagree with your post but that's a utopian world-view. He has used Twitter to his own advantage too many times. He has his fans, I get it. I think he's just a smart-rich lunatic but I rarely look at Twitter unless someone posts a link.
Hard to hate the but with that much power, well ... he's made it obvious his intentions. He's not doing it for humanity.
