3 ms·

> Musk shouts about free speech but shut down Teslas PR department What has Tesla PR got to do with free speech? Or cancelling a pre-order? Journalists and "

by Chris2048 5y ago

> Musk shouts about free speech but shut down Teslas PR department What has Tesla PR got to do with free speech? Or cancelling a pre-order? Journalists and "the media" have little to do with free speech in general, and maybe even a negative effect on free speech if it is though that media representation is an alternative. It's also notable that freedom to express an opinion, and freedom to express something as factual as somewhat different. Twitter generally deals with opinion (and does a poor job of dealing with facts/fact-checking).

V__ 5y ago
If someone touts that free speech is important, but tries to suppress or penalize it, if it is directed against them. One natural conclusion would be, that their commitment is at least questionable.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  The point is that your examples are clearly of "suppressing free speech". For example, what does not having a PR dept supress? And the right to not send a luxury good to a journalist/blogger is hardly a free-speech chilling penalty; refusing service is not censorship.
  - V__ 5y ago
    > The point is that your examples are clearly of "suppressing free speech". But that's what Musk wants to fix on Twitter, so I think it's applicable. > For example, what does not having a PR dept supress? On the face of it nothing, but if the PR dept is closed to make it harder for the press to ask questions, then it's indicative. > And the right to not send a luxury good to a journalist/blogger is hardly a free-speech chilling penalty Of course it is. The next reviewer (if he wants to buy one) will either not review the car or try not to upset Musk with his review. > refusing service is not censorship. Well, then how is refusing service to right-wing users on Twitter censorship?
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      sorry, I mis-typed. I meant not clearly. > to make it harder for the press to ask questions entirely different from censorship or suppression of speech - in fact this is the right not to speech. Free speech implies to right to information. > The next reviewer Same issue with paid reviews, these motivating examples are not much of a challenge to free speech. > how is refusing service to right-wing users on Twitter censorship? Because twitter is a platform for speech, buying a Tesla isn't the same. That said, if there weren't a few large corps monopolising social networking (and usually via shady methods) it wouldn't be so much of a free speech issue either - There would be an issue if Teslas was one of a few car manufacturers also.

V__ 5y ago

If someone touts that free speech is important, but tries to suppress or penalize it, if it is directed against them. One natural conclusion would be, that their commitment is at least questionable.

Chris2048 5y ago
The point is that your examples are clearly of "suppressing free speech". For example, what does not having a PR dept supress? And the right to not send a luxury good to a journalist/blogger is hardly a free-speech chilling penalty; refusing service is not censorship.
- V__ 5y ago
  > The point is that your examples are clearly of "suppressing free speech". But that's what Musk wants to fix on Twitter, so I think it's applicable. > For example, what does not having a PR dept supress? On the face of it nothing, but if the PR dept is closed to make it harder for the press to ask questions, then it's indicative. > And the right to not send a luxury good to a journalist/blogger is hardly a free-speech chilling penalty Of course it is. The next reviewer (if he wants to buy one) will either not review the car or try not to upset Musk with his review. > refusing service is not censorship. Well, then how is refusing service to right-wing users on Twitter censorship?
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    sorry, I mis-typed. I meant not clearly. > to make it harder for the press to ask questions entirely different from censorship or suppression of speech - in fact this is the right not to speech. Free speech implies to right to information. > The next reviewer Same issue with paid reviews, these motivating examples are not much of a challenge to free speech. > how is refusing service to right-wing users on Twitter censorship? Because twitter is a platform for speech, buying a Tesla isn't the same. That said, if there weren't a few large corps monopolising social networking (and usually via shady methods) it wouldn't be so much of a free speech issue either - There would be an issue if Teslas was one of a few car manufacturers also.