this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2024
331 points (88.6% liked)

Technology

59064 readers
3747 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

After the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary released a report accusing the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) of colluding with companies to censor conservative voices online, Elon Musk chimed in. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Musk wrote that X "has no choice but to file suit against the perpetrators and collaborators" behind an advertiser boycott on his platform.

"Hopefully, some states will consider criminal prosecution," Musk wrote, leading several X users to suggest that Musk wants it to be illegal for brands to refuse to advertise on X.

Among other allegations, Congress' report claimed that GARM—which is part of the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), whose members "represent roughly 90 percent of global advertising spend, or almost one trillion dollars annually"—directed advertisers to boycott Twitter shortly after Musk took over the platform.

Twitter/X's revenue tanked after Musk's takeover, with Bloomberg reporting last month that X lost almost 40 percent of revenue in the first six months of 2023 compared to the same period in 2022. That's worse than prior estimates last May, which put Twitter's loss around one-third of its total valuation. Ars chronicled the worst impacts of the ad boycott, including sharp drop-offs in the US, where an internal Twitter presentation leaked to The New York Times showed Twitter's ad revenue was down by as much as 59 percent "for the five weeks from April 1 to the first week of May" in 2023.

Last year, Musk sued other "collaborators" in the X boycott, including hate speech researchers, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), and Media Matters for America (MMFA). However, his suit against the CCDH was dismissed this March, and Media Matters has claimed that Musk filing his MMFA lawsuit in Texas may be "fatal" because of a jurisdictional defect.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 101 points 3 months ago (7 children)

I could have sworn I read that Musk was a free speech absolutist. Freedom for me but not for thee?

[–] [email protected] 67 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is the case with literally every conservative crowing about "free speech". They want full freedom for themselves so that no matter what they say there can't be any negative consequences or reactions, and everybody else can get fucked and die in an extermination camp

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

and the home of the braaaaaaave!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

^*some^ ^terms^ ^and^ ^conditions^ ^apply,^ ^bravery^ ^not^ ^available^ ^in^ ^most^ ^areas^

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

The power of maaaaanyyyyyyyyyy 🤮

[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 months ago

Nope he's just a fascist hiding behind free speech.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Their obsession with “freeze peach” has always been a facade to their true desire which is to censor opposing viewpoints and make their viewpoints the only form of acceptable speech.

You’ll note that everything outside those bounds is “woke” and unacceptable

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

He certainly exercises his free speech to lie about his advocacy for free speech.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

Musk wants freedom of speech for people. But his definition of "people" is very, very narrow.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

I could of sworn I read that shit doesn't actually stink, but the pile of emperic evidence has led me to believe otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

He only believes in the first 22 words of the first amendment. If you want to speak about what he has done, or (far worse) gather with others that share your beliefs to speak extra loud... straight to jail.