Facebook/Meta/Google censorship as part of culture wars: Only X and Clutch allow free speech

hard to believe they would do that to Richard Dawkins . . . gotta think once a real human at fb reads the headlines his account will be restored

 

It isn’t “undisputed” you f*ck face.

How’s that for Twitter’s “civilized argument”

 

[heypartner didn’t read this as he already moved on to rant in another civilized tweet]

 

While I agree with the original tweet, this thread is lolz.


Elon Musk, like Trump, is a habitual untruth spiller. Please don't believe everything he says.


I do love Starlink, though.

 

Didn't Elon disable the White Guys for Harris account and then turned it back on after? On the day of the zoom call was happening to reduce traffic/momentum?

So much for free speech. "Free speech for me, not for thee"

 

X censors and even bans people whom Musk doesn't like. There are plenty of examples of this. It's his personal playground, so he can do whatever he wants and be the hypocrite he is.

 

Elon Musk silences his critics with bogus lawsuits
The X boss sued a group of advertisers for using their rights of freedom of association to not associate with the racist content on the social media site.


By Andy Craig, Director of election policy at the Rainey Center


Elon Musk, self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist,” is demanding the government infringe on free speech rights. Again.

Despite his posturing as a defender of free expression, Musk is one of the nation’s most vexatious litigants against anybody who exercises their First Amendment rights in a way he doesn’t like. His latest target is GARM, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, an industry association of advertisers on online platforms of which X, formerly known as Twitter, is still a member. The lawsuit also targets several of GARM’s members for the supposed crime of declining to purchase ads on Musk’s website.

X’s CEO, Linda Yaccarino, posted a video on Tuesday explaining that the suit is part of the company’s noble pursuit of preserving “the global town square … the one place that you can express yourself freely and openly.” Yaccarino wore a pendant around her neck that read “FREE SPEECH.”


On Thursday, GARM, citing its inability to handle legal fees that would likely run into the seven figures, simply shut its doors, ending all operations. Musk’s censorial bullying worked — abusing the legal system to shut down his critics.

Musk’s argument against GARM fits a long-running pattern for him: attacks on free speech wrapped in the rhetoric of defending free speech.

Major corporations generally do not want to pay for ads running next to posts praising Adolf Hitler, among other noxious content that has flourished on X under Musk’s ownership. It’s hardly an unreasonable position, and GARM worked to promulgate shared standards companies can adopt for this type of brand safety. This, Musk alleges, amounted to a violation of antitrust laws.

Deciding where to purchase ads is an exercise of core free speech and free association rights for any individual or organization. Boycotting X because it’s overrun with hate speech is no different from a conservative advocacy group declining to pay for ads on a progressive podcast. It’s also a case of business judgment for for-profit corporations. PetSmart might well choose to buy magazine ads in Cat Fancy rather than Cigar Aficionado, for example.

It’s the latest in a long line of Musk lawsuits seeking to silence his critics, a tactic known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or SLAPP…….

More at the link: https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/elon-musk-x-advertisers-lawsuit-social-media-rcna165605

 

This is what @AroundTheWorld supports. He is in favor of censoring things he doesn't agree with. But dislikes censorship of ideas and things he agrees with.

 

What I'm keen on, is being against censorship.

Maus, Handmaid’s Tale, And most of the others aren't pronography.