The beef people have with Twitter after the Musk takeover is that it has objectively gotten worse at upholding free speech ideals, even as its new owner claims

The beef people have with Twitter after the Musk takeover is that it has objectively gotten worse at upholding free speech ideals, even as its new owner claims that doing so is one of his main reasons for taking over the social media company. Pre-takeover, the company was generally considered to be the best of the major outfits in standing up to censorious dipshit politicians [1], routinely challenging government attempts to enforce censorship on social media. But since the takeover, there has seemed to be a rather partisan tinge to its attempts to challenge government censorship: the company has notably caved to authoritarian regimes (like Turkey) where it used to challenge it, although it does tend to remain resolute in opposing leftish censorship attempts. Furthermore, the company has gone after people for saying ugly truths about the company [2], going so far as to encourage certain right-wing governors to investigate those people for criminal actions. The patently obvious mismatch between the free speech rhetoric and the censorious actions is the key thing here, not merely the (perceived) odiousness of the opinions on display. [1] Do note that being censorious dipshits is a thoroughly bipartisan activity. [2] Like, they literally admit that what was said is true in their own legal complaint, which just torpedoes everything from day one, without the respondent having to say anything!