Paul Pelosi has undergone brain surgery and is still in the hospital recovering from the brutal attack on him in the early hours of Friday morning. His wife, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, was the apparent object of the home invasion by a right-wing extremist who was yelling “Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy?” as he broke into the house and encountered her husband. She is now under even heavier security than normal, protected by a beefed-up detail of the Capitol Police usually assigned to her.
And it’s high time owners of these “social media” sites be held for libel and defamation of character.
Musk is a f-k head--and if the Pentagon is going to rely on fascist billionaires who own satellites, they are failing their duty to protect this democracy. Musk arbitrarily withdrew his satellite for use by Ukraine.
Musk needs to be put on a leash, like his pal, tRump.
I used it back in 2011 when I lived in Egypt. It was the only way to learn about protests downtown and elsewhere in real time. Otherwise, I honestly had no interest in Twitter and couldn't understand why it was popular.
Certainly you are not suggesting that this madness will stop if I delete my Twitter account? What happens there matters a great deal, as evidenced by Lucian’s latest piece.
Block every advertiser that comes up in your feed. Lack of views will lead advertisers to withdraw, imposing the only kind of pressure Musk fears -- losing money.
As long as msm makes Elon’s tweets headline news, imo the number of subscribers is irrelevant. Whatever TFG writes on his platform gets reposted elsewhere. The mass exodus on Twitter right now is being backfilled by “free speech” magats. I hear your anger but will push back when attempts to shame and blame are misplaced.
The “libertarian“ judicial philosophy that is currently in force regarding free speech is being stress tested to the maximum.
Many of those with law degrees, or donors to the ACLU, or free-speech fundamentalists of whatever stripe, like to take pride in their sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the American concept of “free speech“.
But when the founders wrote the first amendment, and when Brandeis wrote his opinions, and other justices wrote related opinions up until about 30 years ago, the Internet did not exist, or at least it was not nearly as popular and ubiquitous as it has become, and in particular social media applications.
Just as an AR-15 in every home is a very different world than a musket in every frontier cabin, the digital revolution in communications has created a completely different world than the one that existed when the first amendment was written and judicial opinions regarding free speech were articulated in the following two centuries.
We are living in the world that these communications revolutions have created, whether it’s the saturation of cable TV and radio with right-wing hate-filled propaganda, or the viral proliferation of like-minded right wing authoritarian groups on social media platforms, collaborating on projects like the January 6 insurrection, or the militia groups planning to kidnap Michigan’s governor, or the perhaps not-quite-clinically-insane Mr. Depape invading and attacking Paul Pelosi in his home in the dead of night after marinating in this bile for years.
It’s a free-for-all, and the hateful and heavily armed people are causing a lot of havoc. So I’m not entirely sure that the current laws in force springing from historical judicial interpretations of free speech are ones that are going to work in the coming decades.
I'm especially concerned at the moment about armed men in camo or faux-military garb showing up at polling places. My understanding is that at present the laws against terrorism don't apply on U.S. soil. I think they should.
For people like Musk and all those of his ilk, and I include those who back Trump and his sycophants, any lie, innuendo, or embellishment does not have to have any credence or believability at all... it only needs to reinforce what those who hate democrats want to believe. There is no analysis, no thinking, no nuance... and it is so tiresomely repulsive, maddening, and depressing.
In the mid 1930s congress authorized the FCC to establish practical and enforceable rules for Radio and the coming TV. Before 2030 congress will pass stiff laws concerning abuse of the first amendment via the internet. Musk’s legacy might not be cars but tough laws regulating mischief.
This kind of slimy mess is everywhere-in my local paper there was an editorial cartoon yesterday featuring Hillary Clinton (as a witch in a tower) setting loose birds with pieces of paper saying "conspiracy theories about 2024 election" and she's pictured as saying, "Fly away my lovelies!"
That's disgusting, and that's what just one Maine paper is doing.
Then we wonder why there are lunatics running around hitting people with hammers?
Maine papers have become hate-filled right wing rags....unfit to for fish wrapping or even birdcage liners--even Portland's Press Herald, which used to be reliably neutral or slightly left of center.
I saw this in the Lewiston Sun Journal, which I know is right wing, but still, it's offensive. Hillary didn't have anything to do with the 2020 election and still she gets slimed by the right wing.
Yup. LSJ has turned into a RW rag. Once in a great while they run a Leonard Pitts opinion piece, but that's about the only redeeming feature--that and obituaries. In this house it is used to light the woodstove. Fitting, I think.
Handing over the world’s public square to a naive free speech absolutist is a disaster. Whoever Elon picks for CEO, whatever his new ad policy, without rational moderation our public conversation will now be impossible over the unrestrained voices of Nazis, fascists, anti vax loons, Qanon, right wing Jew haters, left wing Jew haters, Putin’s trolls, Xi’s agents, the Ayatollah’s henchmen, Trump, Kanye and Bannon’s crowd. The only thing you now won’t find on Twitter will be criticism of Musk.
You would think a man of his stature would be more mature and dignified than to stoop to tweeting unverified stories, especially ones originating on obscure news sites that had published other strange conspiricy theories. Ang he is the new owner of Twitter. Of course he quickly deleted it but to havve evn posted it in the first place makes you wonder,
So the "common digital town square, where a wide range of beliefs can be debated in a healthy manner, without resorting to violence" Mr. Musk wants to provide is just the same old "post malicious
crap for a few hours then delete" that we've had for twenty or so years now. Can't say I see this as an improvement, not that I was expecting any from yet another overly powerful nutjob who thinks he should be able to call the shots for all of us.
twitter depends on ads and has just this past year or so finally turned a profit.
musk has said that ads are a very important part of running twitter, and said that advertisers don't want their postings to show up in the space with unfavorable posts, so he claimed he'd work on moderating the medium. this in spite of having immediately fired the person who had being doing just that.
musk is a puerile, abhorrent small minded manboy. he is self-centered and erratic in thought and behaviour, so cannot be counted upon to keep his word. his future command over twitter will likely poison it for all normal, reasonable people.
i have seen the suggestion by twitter users to try to convince musk of their objections to his heavy hand by blocking ads, thereby sending immediate notice to advertisers of their stand.
musk's debt relief counts heavily on having twitter's books in the black, so he needs his ad revenues.
although many users are opting out, i feel the best route is to stay in and work to convince advertisers to pull out.
You don’t have to go to the “far reaches” of republican party followers to find lies and every other kind of rhetorical trash imaginable. Pure bullshit is what drives the entire agenda, beginning with their false claim on “Christian values.”
You'll have to do it one company at a time, but you can choose to block every advertiser you see in your feed. If enough people stay on Twitter but block ads, major companies will realize their ads aren't visible and threaten to withdraw. Musk speaks money fluently.
Sue, Sue, Sue.
And it’s high time owners of these “social media” sites be held for libel and defamation of character.
Musk is a f-k head--and if the Pentagon is going to rely on fascist billionaires who own satellites, they are failing their duty to protect this democracy. Musk arbitrarily withdrew his satellite for use by Ukraine.
Musk needs to be put on a leash, like his pal, tRump.
Jesus Christ, just delete your precious Twitter accounts already.
Never had a twitter account and never will.
I never have either...a waste of time.
Me, also.
I’m glad I never joined that cesspool.
I used it back in 2011 when I lived in Egypt. It was the only way to learn about protests downtown and elsewhere in real time. Otherwise, I honestly had no interest in Twitter and couldn't understand why it was popular.
Trump being reinstated in 2022 is exactly the kind of event that might get me to use my barely used Twitter account for relentless mockery.
Chacun a son gout!
Certainly you are not suggesting that this madness will stop if I delete my Twitter account? What happens there matters a great deal, as evidenced by Lucian’s latest piece.
Block every advertiser that comes up in your feed. Lack of views will lead advertisers to withdraw, imposing the only kind of pressure Musk fears -- losing money.
Reasonable and doable. Thank You.
No, but what do you think will happen if 20 million users delete their accounts?
And more to the point, what do you think would happen if literally nobody deleted their account?
Are you afraid you'll be bored or lonely without your Twitter? If not, why not get rid of it?
As long as msm makes Elon’s tweets headline news, imo the number of subscribers is irrelevant. Whatever TFG writes on his platform gets reposted elsewhere. The mass exodus on Twitter right now is being backfilled by “free speech” magats. I hear your anger but will push back when attempts to shame and blame are misplaced.
The “libertarian“ judicial philosophy that is currently in force regarding free speech is being stress tested to the maximum.
Many of those with law degrees, or donors to the ACLU, or free-speech fundamentalists of whatever stripe, like to take pride in their sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the American concept of “free speech“.
But when the founders wrote the first amendment, and when Brandeis wrote his opinions, and other justices wrote related opinions up until about 30 years ago, the Internet did not exist, or at least it was not nearly as popular and ubiquitous as it has become, and in particular social media applications.
Just as an AR-15 in every home is a very different world than a musket in every frontier cabin, the digital revolution in communications has created a completely different world than the one that existed when the first amendment was written and judicial opinions regarding free speech were articulated in the following two centuries.
We are living in the world that these communications revolutions have created, whether it’s the saturation of cable TV and radio with right-wing hate-filled propaganda, or the viral proliferation of like-minded right wing authoritarian groups on social media platforms, collaborating on projects like the January 6 insurrection, or the militia groups planning to kidnap Michigan’s governor, or the perhaps not-quite-clinically-insane Mr. Depape invading and attacking Paul Pelosi in his home in the dead of night after marinating in this bile for years.
It’s a free-for-all, and the hateful and heavily armed people are causing a lot of havoc. So I’m not entirely sure that the current laws in force springing from historical judicial interpretations of free speech are ones that are going to work in the coming decades.
I'm especially concerned at the moment about armed men in camo or faux-military garb showing up at polling places. My understanding is that at present the laws against terrorism don't apply on U.S. soil. I think they should.
They aren’t working now.
Stupid little prick.
Stupid little *rich* prick. Unfortunately $$$ trumps (sorry) all the rest.
Perfect. Maybe too kind.
One more reason to not buy a Tesla. Plenty of other electric cars available with more to come.
For people like Musk and all those of his ilk, and I include those who back Trump and his sycophants, any lie, innuendo, or embellishment does not have to have any credence or believability at all... it only needs to reinforce what those who hate democrats want to believe. There is no analysis, no thinking, no nuance... and it is so tiresomely repulsive, maddening, and depressing.
In the mid 1930s congress authorized the FCC to establish practical and enforceable rules for Radio and the coming TV. Before 2030 congress will pass stiff laws concerning abuse of the first amendment via the internet. Musk’s legacy might not be cars but tough laws regulating mischief.
This kind of slimy mess is everywhere-in my local paper there was an editorial cartoon yesterday featuring Hillary Clinton (as a witch in a tower) setting loose birds with pieces of paper saying "conspiracy theories about 2024 election" and she's pictured as saying, "Fly away my lovelies!"
That's disgusting, and that's what just one Maine paper is doing.
Then we wonder why there are lunatics running around hitting people with hammers?
There's no going back, I fear.
Maine papers have become hate-filled right wing rags....unfit to for fish wrapping or even birdcage liners--even Portland's Press Herald, which used to be reliably neutral or slightly left of center.
I saw this in the Lewiston Sun Journal, which I know is right wing, but still, it's offensive. Hillary didn't have anything to do with the 2020 election and still she gets slimed by the right wing.
Yup. LSJ has turned into a RW rag. Once in a great while they run a Leonard Pitts opinion piece, but that's about the only redeeming feature--that and obituaries. In this house it is used to light the woodstove. Fitting, I think.
Why do you buy it?
Well, if you had read my prior answer that would tell you why we purchase it, wouldn't it?
Handing over the world’s public square to a naive free speech absolutist is a disaster. Whoever Elon picks for CEO, whatever his new ad policy, without rational moderation our public conversation will now be impossible over the unrestrained voices of Nazis, fascists, anti vax loons, Qanon, right wing Jew haters, left wing Jew haters, Putin’s trolls, Xi’s agents, the Ayatollah’s henchmen, Trump, Kanye and Bannon’s crowd. The only thing you now won’t find on Twitter will be criticism of Musk.
Yet another Trump-like sociopath?
This obscenity who thinks he's a "man" is the reason I deleted my Twitter account.
You would think a man of his stature would be more mature and dignified than to stoop to tweeting unverified stories, especially ones originating on obscure news sites that had published other strange conspiricy theories. Ang he is the new owner of Twitter. Of course he quickly deleted it but to havve evn posted it in the first place makes you wonder,
Could have been said of Trump just before his Obama birth certificate racist enrollment campaign.
So the "common digital town square, where a wide range of beliefs can be debated in a healthy manner, without resorting to violence" Mr. Musk wants to provide is just the same old "post malicious
crap for a few hours then delete" that we've had for twenty or so years now. Can't say I see this as an improvement, not that I was expecting any from yet another overly powerful nutjob who thinks he should be able to call the shots for all of us.
twitter depends on ads and has just this past year or so finally turned a profit.
musk has said that ads are a very important part of running twitter, and said that advertisers don't want their postings to show up in the space with unfavorable posts, so he claimed he'd work on moderating the medium. this in spite of having immediately fired the person who had being doing just that.
musk is a puerile, abhorrent small minded manboy. he is self-centered and erratic in thought and behaviour, so cannot be counted upon to keep his word. his future command over twitter will likely poison it for all normal, reasonable people.
i have seen the suggestion by twitter users to try to convince musk of their objections to his heavy hand by blocking ads, thereby sending immediate notice to advertisers of their stand.
musk's debt relief counts heavily on having twitter's books in the black, so he needs his ad revenues.
although many users are opting out, i feel the best route is to stay in and work to convince advertisers to pull out.
I am blocking every advertiser that comes up in my feed.
You don’t have to go to the “far reaches” of republican party followers to find lies and every other kind of rhetorical trash imaginable. Pure bullshit is what drives the entire agenda, beginning with their false claim on “Christian values.”
What can we do to burden the app to the max while boycotting all advertisers that fund it? Make Musky pay the expenses out of his own pocket.
You'll have to do it one company at a time, but you can choose to block every advertiser you see in your feed. If enough people stay on Twitter but block ads, major companies will realize their ads aren't visible and threaten to withdraw. Musk speaks money fluently.
Thanks