𝕏 / Twitter / X, the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter / "MUSK OWNS TWITTER"

[1962s Godzilla]

We can always dream of seeing Media Matters just shatter to the ground. This is at least better than nothing, the Attorney General of Texas, one step at a time,

 

[MadStan]

So Elon states you can say anything on Twitter and it’s free speech - regardless of the damage it does to a person or company . But when someone executes free speech and it hurts his bottom line, he’s against it.

Musk won’t have his cake and eat it too.

 

[Sammich]

Likely will end in a settlement. I don't think MediaMatters would want their private emails revealed via discovery.

That's my guess on the reason for the lawsuit, discovery would be fucking lovely.

 

[AnthonyLoggerhead]

Good, I hope the presstitutes at media matters lose their gravy train & have to live off neetbux

 

[WelperHelper99]

Bold of you to assume they'd follow a court order to hold evidence. Media Matter's founder is close to the Clintons. I want them to fail, but I'm expecting favors will be called in to prevent it.

I think Elon is rich enough to bribe his bodyguards not to kill him. I also think he's rich enough to over power the Clinton's Legally

 

[BoomerSperg1922]

I sincerely hope something comes out of this. I don't care what you think of Elon Musk or Twitter, Media Matters is the absolute scum of the Earth; the quintessential example of scumbag journalists; the lowest of the low, vermin masquerading as principled people. They'd sell their own mothers for a few extra shekels. They deserve to be sued into the stone age.

This, they are essentially a shakedown organization that engages in behavior that would be illegal for anyone else.

"We see you are platforming X, it would be a shame if (financial services supporting you) got wind of it."

That's called tortious interference, and it is a crime.

 

[Retink Retunk]

Media Matters is worse than the ADL.

 

[Baraka Obama]

He might actually. Anons found proof that MM actually photoshopped ads in order to slander Musk and X.

Could someone share the details on this?

 

[MadStan]

This, they are essentially a shakedown organization that engages in behavior that would be illegal for anyone else.

"We see you are platforming X, it would be a shame if (financial services supporting you) got wind of it."

That's called tortious interference, and it is a crime.

And do you have a shred of proof they did this?

 

[Meat Target]

Those whiny fucks at MM facing some consequences for their bullshitting? Pinch me, I'm dreaming!

 

[mindlessobserver]

It's an interesting argument, but it's not as easy as it seems. I mean, X DID put the ads next to the "Le Hate Speech". Sure if MM deliberately goosed the algorithm into doing that it's mitigating circumstances for X' (formerly twitter) reputation, but there is a strong argument to be made that MM did not LIE. They just didn't tell the whole story.

Which is kinda what all Journalists do. Just in this case way more extreme. What's also extreme is just how much Data X has on its users accounts that it can literally put a stat "this pairing has a .00000009% chance of occurring" in a legal complaint. Like Jesus fuck, there is being oddly specific with your stats, and then there is that fucking gem.

Also, X even knows how its users are scrolling? That is fascinating.

this is gonna be a fun one too be sure.

 

[BoomerSperg1922]

And do you have a shred of proof they did this?

That is literally why they exist and it's all they do.

What do you think articles like this are for?


If you think they aren't preceded by e-mails asking for "clarification" about why they have "evil nazis" on their service and what their financial partners would think, you are braindead.

Edit:

Here's another rumble article since I doubt you will bother to actually click on anything to read them.

 

[Nate Higgers]

Filed in Texas, so maybe there's a chance this isn't D.O.A.

The state of Texas literally has laws against BDS. Don’t get ahead of your skis.

 

[MadStan]

It's an interesting argument, but it's not as easy as it seems. I mean, X DID put the ads next to the "Le Hate Speech". Sure if MM deliberately goosed the algorithm into doing that it's mitigating circumstances for X' (formerly twitter) reputation, but there is a strong argument to be made that MM did not LIE. They just didn't tell the whole story.

Which is kinda what all Journalists do. Just in this case way more extreme. What's also extreme is just how much Data X has on its users accounts that it can literally put a stat "this pairing has a .00000009% chance of occurring" in a legal complaint. Like Jesus fuck, there is being oddly specific with your stats, and then there is that fucking gem.

Also, X even knows how its users are scrolling? That is fascinating.

this is gonna be a fun one too be sure.

But it’s a sideshow. The advertisers pulled after Elon was accused of liking a tweet that was reported as being antisemitic. Then the advertisers left. After this MM did their thing and while Misk can scream all he wants, the fact is that his site DOES allow this hate content and what’s his argument - that they do have hateful shit but ads will never appear next to those tweets? But they might?

I will read the lawsuit in full; but I don’t like Misks chances of proving damage given that the advertisers used HIS liking of an infamous tweet to justify their leaving.

If all he can prove is MM was right but not 100% right then he has to prove the advertisers left because of MM and they will say they left because of his hateful content and his liking of the tweet that preceded. He’s got an uphill battle to prove anything.

He can’t prove MM made anyone do anything. Good luck to him; he’s gonna need it.

 

[frozen_runner]

So Elon states you can say anything on Twitter and it’s free speech - regardless of the damage it does to a person or company . But when someone executes free speech and it hurts his bottom line, he’s against it.

Musk won’t have his cake and eat it too.

Nothing ad-supported can truly support freedom of speech for its users. It sucks, but that's reality.

 

[Pee Cola]

So Elon states you can say anything on Twitter and it’s free speech - regardless of the damage it does to a person or company . But when someone executes free speech and it hurts his bottom line, he’s against it.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. If MM's actions constitute defamation against Musk and Twitter, then they need to be dealt with accordingly.

 

[MadStan]

That is literally why they exist and it's all they do.

What do you think articles like this are for?
View attachment 5510171

If you think they aren't preceded by e-mails asking for "clarification" about why they have "evil nazis" on their service and what their financial partners would think, you are braindead.

Edit:

Here's another rumble article since I doubt you will bother to actually click on anything to read them.
View attachment 5510190

So where is the letter you implied exists threatening to cut off finances to advertisers who won’t leave?

To quote you "We see you are platforming X, it would be a shame if (financial services supporting you) got wind of it."

Got a letter? Even a hint of this? No? Perhaps MM should be suing you.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Yeah, it's honestly not a good argument by Musk, because a boomer judge is going to look at .0000009% and do the dumb and dumber quoute; "but you think there's a chance".

There are way too many negatives to prove, and alot of it hinges on evidence production that is held by third parties like Apple and New York Times Co. Institutions that are part of the same cathedral as Media Matters.

There is a reason scumbags like MM can get away with so much. Because just like us, while what they do is annoying to alot of people, it's not strictly illegal.

 

[4090 Chad]

I feel like a large part of why Elon is fighting back against these kikes so hard is because one of his children trooned out. Deep down him going after these leftist media kikes is an act of vengeance for him.

 

[Some Dumb Faggot]

I hope Media Matters gets literally raped to death, but I don't see this going anywhere. There is nothing illegal about calling up advertisers and warning them that they advertise on a Nazi platform. They're going to argue freedom of speech, and that is how the jury and mainstream media will interpret it, and unfortunately that's what it is. In the absence of concrete threats like "we're going to run a smear campaign against your company if you don't pull out", this lolsuit is dead on arrival.

Doomerfags need to 41% themselves already.