• NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    1 year ago

    For context, this all started Thursday when the ADL xeeted that is had a “frank and productive” conversation with X’s CEO. She replied with some warm and fuzzy PR bullshit about working together to improve the platform blah blah blah. But the right wing nutjobs weren’t happy with the implication that X was in anyway cooperating with the ADL and there was immediate backlash. “Ban the ADL” became a trending hashtag, because, according to the racist majority on X, the ADL is the actual hate group and they pressure advertisers who in turn pressure platforms to “ban free speech.” Musk, always quick to undermine the sad sack holding the title “CEO” jumped on that bandwagon and been xeeting about it all weekend, threatening to ban them, generally talking trash, and now threatening to sue.

    I find it depressing that I’m aware of all this.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      they pressure advertisers who in turn pressure platforms to “ban free speech.”

      This argument of theirs is so strange. Don’t advertisers too have free speech? Is the right wing arguing that advertisers shouldn’t be allowed to choose to stop advertising with Twitter? What “pressure” can ADL put on them? Does the ADL have legal authority to force advertisers to exit Twitter? No. Is the ADL holding private information about the CEOs of advertisers and extorting the advertisers to leave? Not likely.

      Is the ADL communicating a position that the majority of the advertiser’s customers find the racist, fascist, and misogynistic content now omnipresent on Twitter distasteful, and therefore harmful to the advertisers’ brands and with negative impacts to future sales? Likely yes, but those statements are themselves free speech on the part of the ADL.

      What the right wing seems to be arguing is that the definition of free speech should be the right to say whatever racist, fascist, and misogynistic comments they like without anyone making choices of their own to dissociate with the right wing. That’s not free speech that’s…fascism!

      • neptune@dmv.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly? Musk might be so used to big business wining in court that he thinks they might just reflexively take his side.

      • Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Perhaps ironically it is the ADLs free speech that allows them to show advertisers what is posted on elons website. Further irony can be found in the fact that a screenshot of elsons website showing bigoted posts is an example of fact and not of feelings. Moreover: crying about your lost ad revenue is feelings and blaming the ADL for it is not facts.

      • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t advertisers too have free speech?

        I remember around 2020, a lot of freethinkers began spouting something about how Twitter is “a platform not a publisher” and therefore users are entitled to treat the website like a public meeting place and protected by first amendment rights, etc.

        It was basically a Soverign Citizen argument about how Section 230 means websites don’t have the authority to moderate content at all, and it died down after Trump stopped preaching it after he launched Truth

        Some articles about the notion:

        https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/no-section-230-does-not-require-platforms-be-neutral

        https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/publisher-or-platform-it-doesnt-matter

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I remember around 2020, a lot of freethinkers began spouting something about how Twitter is “a platform not a publisher” and therefore users are entitled to treat the website like a public meeting place and protected by first amendment rights, etc.

          I think you’re taking that quote of mine with an unintended meaning. I didn’t mean to suggest advertisers have right to post what they want, rather they have the choice to NOT post if they don’t want to. The right-wing argument appears to suggest that advertisers should be powerless to choose or not choose to advertise. Suggesting they are wheat to be harvested. A resource owned by the company they are purchasing advertising from; its a bizarre notion.

      • MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s never ok to hurt somebody’s business just because you disagree with them giving free speech to everybody. The ADL should pay Elon for the damage they did to his business

    • Serinus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s hard to take that seriously when you use “xeeted”.

    • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I almost feel bad for the new “CEO”. It really seems like she’s doing her best to give the impression that Twitter is still a sane company with reasonable business practices, only for Elon to completely disregard her messaging and do the exact opposite.

      • InvaderDJ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would feel bad if it wasn’t obvious that Musk would do this. It is impossible for him to control himself. He can’t help to put his dumbass opinion in the mix, no matter how much it hurts him personally and professionally. It’s the reason he was forced to buy Twitter in the first place.

        • Overzeetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          Drop me in her seat for 7 figures with a nice kick-out clause (no stock, please) and I’ll pretend Xitter is a wholesome, thoughtful, productive corporate citizen, too.

      • NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a shitty position to be in so I almost feel bad as well, except literally everyone knew this was going to happen when she joined. But I doubt she thought, “What’s the worst that could happen? I have a bland conversation with the ADL, and Musk spends the weekend retweeting self deacribed antisemites and threatening to ban/sue the ADL?”

        She is scheduled to be at the Code Conference hosted by the Verge/Vox at the end of September. I’m really interested in how she answers when asked about being undermined, especially now that the undermining has taken the form of her boss just being an outright antisemite.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Look he’s not an antisemite, he just thinks antisemitic people should have free speech, but not anyone pointing out that he thinks that”