I’m only going from my reading of this article (yes, read the whole thing), but the discussion point that is missing is that of the media barron. Unique amongst

I’m only going from my reading of this article (yes, read the whole thing), but the discussion point that is missing is that of the media barron. Unique amongst major corporate ownership, owning a media company brings not only profits but a direct ability to shape the daily message and narrative. I think this is why the trove of SMS between Musk and otter elites is so fascinating and why many were keen to be in on the action. Not so much for the perceived future profits but from their ability to shape the media narrative. How you ask? Quietly agree on messaging priorities behind the scenes with your cartel of rich buddies, hire smart people to focus on addressing policy question related to those underlying priorities. In large media groups the founder doesn’t even need to activist coerce or apply force, it’s well documented the occurance of self-censorship where employees just take account of what the big boss might want. This factor is much more neutral when the shareholders are large managed funds, but Twitter can much more keenly be wielded for personal gain once there is a dominate entrepreneurial owner at the helm.