Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Elon Musk Is Officially Purchasing Twitter for $44 Billion

chscag said:
This is a great thing for free speech!
Click to expand...
It’s only good for freedom of speech for those who want to lie and promote violence.
Truth and our democracy will suffer as a result. Drowned under a flood of lies supporting powerful anti-democratic players who wrap themselves in the flag while pissing on actual democracy.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Atomic Walrus and MacNeb
iObama said:
Literally what makes you think a car company CEO can save a social media company other than the fact that he’s rich?

I’ll never understand the blind loyalty to Elon Musk.
Click to expand...
How else do you ever think other than literally think? Do you figuratively think some of the time? How does that work? Your use of "literally" makes no sense.

Musk has done much more than run one company. Look up his history.

What we do know: twitter has had some spectacular failures in the last 3 years, and they have never accounted for those failures. Nobody has blind faith in Musk to succeed. OTOH, he has earned the right to try; it's his dime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacNeb, Boyyai and xObeyThePanda
Generally these so called, I will Fix statements, end up trading one kind of censorship for another. Elon Musk has a proven track record of low tolerance for differing opinions based on his historical posts. Will have to see how it plays out.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Atomic Walrus, ric22 and turbineseaplane
k2director said:
Give me a break. It’s conservatives who have been censored on Twitter and all over democrat-run social media.

Everything went online starting in the 2000s, including the biggest opportunities for expression. But the tools for that expression have been run exclusively by leftwing, progressive nuts, who have actively tried to suppress any viewpoint they strongly disagree with or that might hurt their chances of seeing their political candidates win elections. That’s why Twitter suppressed the truthful story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. And why Facebook wouldn’t let anyone say anything in defense of Kyle Rittenhouse before the trial (though they were allowed to disparage him). And why Social media was rife with posts constantly undermining Trumps legitimate election with ridiculous talk about him being a Russian agent but Trump couldn’t suggest the 2020 election was illegitimate. Meanwhile rising stars of the Democratic Party like Stacey Abrams speak freely about losing due to election fraud and refuse to concede.

In other words, you can say it if it benefits progressives. You can’t say it if it harms their narratives.

Here’s how it should go: Everyone gets to speak as long as it’s not threatening violence or openly encouraging it. And no, words that upset you are not violence. If you don’t like the words, don’t read them.

I hope Musk cleans all that up pronto.
Click to expand...
Your post will be moderated away shortly, but I wanted to chip in first. Conservatives aren't silenced for dissenting views- it just happens that the last few years there's been a wave of disinformation that some conservatives have bought into, fuelled by a conservative president who had a peculiar relationship with the truth.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: MacNeb, Boyyai, Pirate! and 6 others
ric22 said:
Conservatives aren't silenced for dissenting views- it just happens that the last few years there's been a wave of disinformation that some conservatives have bought into, fuelled by a conservative president who had a peculiar relationship with the truth.
Click to expand...

Exactly right.
It's not about specific political alliances of users, but rather the content some are absorbing up and pushing

(I have this exact view about traditional very far left whack-a-doo anti-vax stuff as well)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cwwilson, Atomic Walrus, Pirate! and 3 others
I think one thing that some are losing sight of is that if all accounts get verified (ie... one person may hold one personal account and one professional account) and you have to be verified to speak up, then your words can be traced to YOU and YOU can pay the consequences for having said them by whomever YOUR words harm or represent.

If Twitter is the town square, then there should be no anonymous people in it. That - after some dramatic adjustment -- would be a great thing. Society can shun the idiots and not rely on big tech to do it.

I see this as a net good thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
We also need to dismiss any of this "free speech" talk.

A private company can call its site "the town square", but that doesn't make it so and "free speech" and "private companies" have no relationship with each other.

In fact, private companies can be held legally responsible for things on their platform at times.
It's not smart for them to allow anything/everything necessarily
 
turbineseaplane said:
Just a reminder that less content moderation ≠ more free speech.

It just means that the speech of the vulnerable, the harassed, and the targets of hate speech will be silenced, or at least chilled

Elon has a long hill to climb to prove that he now cares about the fair, but perhaps not favorable, views of everyone, particularly as they relate to him and his companies personally.
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
gnipgnop said:
And? Musk doesn't directly own Twitter. The entity does.
Click to expand...

You wrote "controlled" which doesn't imply complete ownership.

Press release from Twitter states complete ownership of the entity.

If you feel the need to pedantically split hairs over direct ownership vs owning the entity which owns it, that's your perogative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back