3 ms·
> Twitter doesnt care about free speech. It cares about revenue. And yet, when Twitter allowed a tiny bit more free speech, the same people who complained abou
by smsm42 3y ago
> Twitter doesnt care about free speech. It cares about revenue.
And yet, when Twitter allowed a tiny bit more free speech, the same people who complained about corporations only caring about money started complaining that a) Twitter is hell now, and b) it's going to kill Twitter financially, but Musk doesn't care, because he's a crazy billionaire, and we need protections against crazy billionaires ruining valuable things.
> You do it by creating echo chambers that re-enforce their prejudices
And yet, significant number of complaints in the article is about how Musk ruined their nice echo chamber by letting the wrong-side accounts back in. So is the echo chamber bad or is it good? Or is it bad when it's people that disagree with me control it (then it's a pandemonium infested with trolls and misinformation), and good when people that agree with me control it (then it's a clean safe space platform that can be trusted and is full of valuable insights)?
- andyjohnson0 3y agoYou seem to be making a political point. I was simply pointing out that twitter just wants to show ads to as many people as possible. Thinking that it cares about free speech is a category error.
- BaseballPhysics 3y ago> And yet, when Twitter allowed a tiny bit more free speech Did they! Was that before or after they banned a bunch of journalist's accounts for making Elon mad? https://observer.com/2022/12/left-wing-twitter-accounts-criticizing-elon-musk-are-being-suspended-for-platform-manipulation-and-spam/ https://observer.com/2022/12/left-wing-twitter-accounts-crit... https://www.thewrap.com/elon-musk-called-out-banned-left-wing-accounts/ https://www.thewrap.com/elon-musk-called-out-banned-left-win... https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/a-leaked-internal-message-appears-to-show-elon-musk-ordered-twitter-staff-to-suspend-a-left-wing-activist-s-account/ar-AA16NS0X https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/a-leaked-internal-mess... If you're really such a fan of free speech, you've bet on the wrong horse.
- smsm42 3y agoYou do know what "a tiny bit" means? That's why I didn't say "Twitter became a bastion of free speech with spectacular record", I said "allowed a tiny bit more of free speech". I'm not betting on any horses here - as I wrote in another comment here, I left Twitter years before the whole Musk brouhaha started, and I am not planning to return ever. I am just noting not all complaints can be taken at face value.
- BaseballPhysics 3y ago> I said "allowed a tiny bit more of free speech" I see, so on the one hand banned journalists, but on the otherhand reinstated white nationalist accounts so, you know, net positive in your books? Okay. Sure. Why not.
- SV_BubbleTime 3y agoNo journalists were banned. A few were suspended for a short time after Twitter say the broke written TOS. Be honest and clear.
- BaseballPhysics 3y agoFor a free speech purist that should be a distinction without a difference.
- smsm42 3y agoThey didn't ban journalists, and classifying people they reinstated as "white nationalists" without any further distinction is an extremely disingenuous take. Twitter restored tens of thousands of accounts, and the reasons for bans were extremely varied, so there's no way you could know every single one of those (62000 just at one reinstatement) are "white nationalists" and that's why they were reinstated. Among those restored were Kanye West, Jordan Peterson, satirical site "Babylon Bee", Kathy Griffin and tens of thousands of others. You are just throwing it out to smear them all because of political hate, because pre-Musk twitter mostly (though not only) banned people leaning to the right. Which makes me think your intent is not to understand what I said but to maliciously misinterpret it to accuse me of some political sin that appears heinous to you. I have little interest in that, goodbye.