Is free speech good?

[Anonymous]

Last night the Free Speech Absolutist Elon Musk removed the blue checks, changed the algorithm to crush their engagement, and removed the ability to get subscriptions, from dozens of big MAGA accounts who criticized him.

It's not about free speech, it's about amplification of speech, and the person owning the media is the one who gets to choose.

Same with Bezos and the other billionaires owning media companies.

[DryGermanGuy]

Musk and his shrieking dogmatism just about destroyed his own platform for "free speech".

https://www.youtube.com/embed/p9ryQEzMmIk

[DrPepper12]

Anyone who believes the Space Nazi is a fool. You'd be better off listening to his motley pet...

[slatyb]

Musk owns X, a social media company. Amazon owns a couple of relatively small sites like Goodreads. There isn't much discussion there.

You are right, the organization that owns the site can restrict what people can post. The US government generally cannot.

[Asker]

"In August 2013, Jeff Bezos purchased The Washington Post and other local publications, websites, and real estate." "relatively small sites" my ass.

[slatyb]

The Washington Post had been losing money for years, and Bezos considered impoortant to the country to have an independent press. At the outset Bezos said that he did not want to control the content of the Washington Post and that they were to cover Amazon like any other company. He was able to grow the paper through online subscriptions, and expanded the editorial staff of the Post. He had a good reputation with the staff. I don't know the situation today.

[Asker]

That's what Bezos said, was it? Just before the election he blocked the paper from endorsing Harris, causing hundreds of thousands of subscribers to cancel and multiple staff to resign. Seems he wasn't being entirely truthful, doesn't it?

[purplepoppy]

No, all it seem to be good for is stiring up hatred and making peoples lives a misery. Has anyone ever thought that if we didn't keep banging on about things just because we can then we wouldn't have daily mass shootings.

[Asker]

Let them stand on soap boxes and rant on street corners, but don't publish them to the whole world unless they have something serious to say!

If the purpose of something is "free speech", it will end up a cess pool where nobody reasonable wants to go. If the purpose is discussion, it needs good moderation, to keep things moderate.

This place is teetering on the edge Twitter fell over some time ago.

[RageBabe]

Okay.

[Asker]

I'm not sure of your, or his, point, other than stolen valour.

[exitseven]

Yes, it is one of the things that Americans have and many other countries do not.

[Asker]

So you disagree with Musk taking away blue check marks from Maga people he doesn't agree with?

[exitseven]

I don't know about blue checkmark. I know that Twitter consoles conservatives
And after Elon bought it there is no censorshop.

[Asker]

Removing privileges from people who disagree with you is censorship. And don't tell me he didn't do worse to left wing voices.

[exitseven]

*censors*

[exitseven]

The liberals left X on their own because they did not want to be reminded when a bad president Biden was and how bad his policies were for America.

[Asker]

No, they left because suddenly there were a lot of people who had been banned let back on and because their posts strangely didn't reach as many people as before Musk took over. Advertisers left in droves because their adverts were being shown alongside unapologetically fascist content.

[OddBeMe]

People with money have always had more control. But we can easily not use Twitter anymore. Lots are migrating already