4 ms·
As the past two years of Twitter's evolution have shown, more power to Elon Musk actually leads to more censorship. He's running the social media service like
by pavlov 2y ago
As the past two years of Twitter's evolution have shown, more power to Elon Musk actually leads to more censorship.
He's running the social media service like a kingdom where lèse-majesté is the gravest offense, promoting himself and blocking any topics that he doesn't personally like (including the existence of his own daughter who posts on Threads now).
Old Twitter had flawed content moderation processes, but at least there was a process.
- seydor 2y ago[flagged]
- hkt 2y agoViolent?
- seydor 2y agoA judges' orders are delivered via the threat or the use of violence.
- ivewonyoung 2y agoHere's some examples of the judge's overreach from a 2022 NYT article. https://archive.is/plQFT https://archive.is/plQFT Police showing up at 6am to search your house because you happened to be in whatsapp group where someone else joked about a coup is definitely violence.
- sebazzz 2y agoThere is freedom of opinion, not freedom of speech.
- Levitz 2y agoIn what way does taking X off Brazil decrease the censorship in Brazil?
- cassianoleal 2y agoIt certainly makes whatever censorship might be taking place less skewed by Musk's personal whims.
- Gud 2y agoNo, because that speech could (presumably, can never be sure what’s allowed in a quasi-democracy) take place on another website.
- cassianoleal 2y agoYes but it wouldn't be subjected to Musk's censorship on Random Website, whereas on Twitter it is.
- Gud 2y agoYes, but if the government censors it, it’s forbidden on both. Surely you muse see the difference?
- cassianoleal 2y agoYes, I do. That's precisely my point. It's based on law. Brazil is a democratic country. The law is the will of the people, or at least it is as much as bullshit USA-based representative democracy goes. Still much closer to the will of the people than Musk's personal opinions and whims.
- Gud 2y agoSorry, but you are completely missing the point. Have a nice day.
- cassianoleal 2y agoI don't think I am. I think you're having a hard time understanding that people may see your point and still disagree with it. Have a nice day yourself!
- rapsey 2y agoI mean he paid 40 billion. He can run it any way he pleases.
- okasaki 2y agoI thought he borrowed it? In which case he definitely can't run it any way he pleases.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nradov 2y agoDebtors generally have no direct authority over management decisions unless the borrower defaults. So legally speaking, someone with majority voting control over a company can pretty much run it any way he pleases. (I am clarifying corporate governance rules here, not taking a position on recent management decisions.)
- throw0101d 2y ago> lèse-majesté TIL: > Lèse-majesté or lese-majesty (UK: /ˌliːz ˈmædʒɪsti/ leez MAJ-ist-ee, US: /ˌleɪz -/ layz - )[1][2][3] is an offence or defamation against the dignity of a ruling head of state (traditionally a monarch but now more often a president) or of the state itself. The English name for this crime is a modernised borrowing from the medieval French, where the phrase meant 'a crime against the Crown'. In classical Latin, laesa māiestās meant 'hurt/violated majesty' or 'injured sovereignty' (originally with reference to the majesty of the sovereign people, in post-classical Latin also of the monarch).[2][3] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lèse-majesté https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lèse-majesté