African Musk: Not a Fragrance

[broncofan]

Latest thought bubble by the genius - charge people a monthly fee to use Twitter. If this happens I suspect it might be the final nail in the coffin. The business model for social media has been to attract an audience with a free platform and then charge businesses to target ads at them.
https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/18/el...e-its-service/

Yes and this is a worse idea even though his ad revenue is way down. I think he must not care about the money in twitter at all. He is using it as a personal microphone, using it to promote his idea of free speech however inconsistent, and to promote people he likes. It's the dumbest personal crusade I've ever seen. It really must be the only way he can feel any self-esteem.

I almost left when he limited dms to 100 a day. Two things that would make me delete my account for sure. Requiring me to pay. Requiring me to submit any personal or financial information to him.

[broncofan]

What bullshit:


It's the easy way for him to stop losing money since he's scared off advertisers by being an asshole.

His most recent tweet was that Russell Brand is not evil. I can't imagine tweeting something like that. If you aren't sure about the charges (I think they're very likely true), say you'd like to see him have his day in court or something like that. But I don't see how you can just dismiss charges like this without knowing anything more. Advertisers don't like apologists for rape.

[filghy2]

It's the easy way for him to stop losing money since he's scared off advertisers by being an asshole.

It's not likely to work because a fall in users will result in even less advertising revenue. Trying to make this up by increasing charges would just create a vicious circle.

The thing that sustains Twitter is that size creates its own inertia. Most people have kept posting there, despite their reservations, because that's where the audience is. People keep using it because its free, convenient and lots of people they are interested in are on there. But if you do enough to disrupt that equilibrium you can create a downward spiral.

And all this because he refuses to honestly address the fundamental issue of why advertising has fallen so much.

[broncofan]

It's not likely to work because a fall in users will result in even less advertising revenue. Trying to make this up by increasing charges would just create a vicious circle.

The thing that sustains Twitter is that size creates its own inertia. Most people have kept posting there, despite their reservations, because that's where the audience is. People keep using it because its free, convenient and lots of people they are interested in are on there. But if you do enough to disrupt that equilibrium you can create a downward spiral.

And all this because he refuses to honestly address the fundamental issue of why advertising has fallen so much.

I've mentioned that I'm in a group chat of about 50 people with similar politics on twitter. Everyone agrees they want an alternative and about every week someone finds a site and distributes links to create a username at the new site. The problem is that the other site, as you indicate, may not have generated enough traffic to catch on. Or sometimes the features on the other site make it much less fun. Sometimes the new site has decent features but is confusing as hell to use and a lot of people give up.

Without an alternative, it's hard to create a red line to leave bc most people consider only whether they'd rather post on twitter or not.

There is the issue of why advertising has fallen off and I think Elon is just so muddled in his thinking on this. No electronic app that allows millions of people to hear what "catturd" says can be analogous to the public square. Because in the public square people are limited in their reach by how hard it is to generate an audience and the logistics of getting lots of people to congregate and listen to you.

I don't see how a right to speak without being thrown in jail or being liable to suit can be equivalent to a right to be broadcasted.

Now Musk can use phrases like "we said freedom of speech not freedom of reach" but this is sophistry. If you limit someone's reach so that nobody sees them, you have prevented them from speaking, which is a broadcaster's or private forum owner's right. If you allow someone to develop a fanbase of millions while saying things that aren't true and that cause public harm, you are not like the government official who decides not to prosecute such a person. That person has a constitutional guarantee not to be prosecuted. They had no legal right to be on Elon's forum or to have Elon permit them to be broadcasted to millions.

Boycotts against Elon and his dumb idea are perfectly just. That guy can fuck himself with a cactus......

[Fitzcarraldo]

The Hard Times is a satire site that mostly does music-related stuff, but not always:
https://thehardtimes.net/lists/50-bo...han-elon-musk/

[Helvis2012]

Well put. Elon is a real disappointment.

[filghy2]

He's at it again.

Elon Musk tweeted his fervent agreement with an antisemitic statement on Wednesday night.

A tweet posted by @breakingbaht on Wednesday night read: “Jewish communties [sic] have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.”

The billionaire owner and CTO of X, formerly Twitter, responded the same evening: “You have said the actual truth.” In another reply, he wrote: “I am deeply offended by ADL’s messaging and any other groups who push de facto anti-white racism or anti-Asian racism or racism of any kind.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...itic-tweet-adl

[Stavros]

.

In another reply, he wrote: “I am deeply offended by ADL’s messaging and any other groups who push de facto anti-white racism or anti-Asian racism or racism of any kind.”

So what he actually objects to is the political activism of the Anti-Defamation League, and he could have said so without blundering into a rhetorical flourish which suggests he reacts to situations emotionally, rather than with a sober and critical mind. I don't suppose being opposed to the ADL is by definition anti-Semitic, though I don't doubt some who do, are. This language oozing out the the latest chapter in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is soaked in ignorance and prejudice of a kind I had hoped we would never see or hear again.

If it further damages the X brand, I wonder if it will survive another year.

[BostonBad]

A lot of people are a fan of Musk's approach to free speech, in particular people under 30. The current global issue which brought about the current debate has no "good side" or "bad side."

But one side clearly dominates the media's voice and how each side is presented to the public. We are told one side is bad, which why people are boycotting Starbucks and McDonald's.

Each side is genetically similar and speak a similar language. This is a family fight. They have been screwing each other over for 3000 years, and some peace talks and a few bombs won't fix it.

I say let Musk say what he wants to say and let people post what they post, unless it's advocating violence.

[Fitzcarraldo]

I say let Musk say what he wants to say and let people post what they post, unless it's advocating violence.

He does say what he wants to say. But no one is obligated to pay for advertising on his site.

And which side "clearly dominates the media's voice" depends on which media you follow.