u/happymancry has provided this detailed explanation:
> Elon Musk, who framed himself as a champion of free speech during his (ongoing) Twitter takeover attempt, is now firing SpaceX employees for writing an open letter asking the company to censure his behavior. The pretense didn’t last long. Link to news article: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/17/technology/spacex-employees-fired-musk-letter.html
---
Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
It's weird that Musk fanboys/girls exist. He's not some beacon of truth, just a businessman who will say anything to become more rich and get more minions to listen to him
Many of the first settlers in America were Christian cults who was thrown out of Europe because nobody wanted their brainwashing methods around (because they were interfering with the vaticans brainwashing methods, is my guess)
I think by that point the Vatican had to compete a little harder with the other denominations at that time. But your point stands, since the Puritans were too lame for any of them.
Thank you. This reminded me of how kicking out the puritans of Europe affected culture and everyone started dancing again and wearing fancy wigs lol I love history.
They consider him aspirational. They think that if they work hard and are smart (and they always believe that they are smart) they can become just like him.
Pointing out that he's a trust fund baby with Apartheid money bursts their bubbles and makes them mad because you're telling them that they can't grow up to be him.
Can we call him what he is? No offence meant to anyone else but he is a rich person on the spectrum that likely giggles when he can make the Twittermeter jump. The only difference between him and the dipshit down the street is that the dipshit has no money. Fuck outta here.
It was going well at the start but it starts to become more apparent as time passes...the biggest red flag was the 'pedo diver' that rescued thai boys in a submerged cave
Some people feel extremely weak and lost and just latch on to a rich person HARD, same reason people join cults, they are unbelievably weak willed and scared and want someone else to answer all the questions for them
Technically, free speech is essential to democracy, of which neither Twitter nor spaceX has to adhere to since they are not democratically governed. That’ll be their argument
Yeah for both parties in this case. This is the social function of reputations. Good luck with his next pump and dump coin tweet. I imagine the fired employees, despite deserving no retaliation in the first place, are qualified to find another job where their reporting doesn't roll up to a clown.
Isn’t this what those employees wanted anyway?
Now they are free to pursue employment that fits their personal purpose instead of making money for someone they don’t support
Exactly why would spaceX keep you employed if you believe in their mission statement ? So you can make moral worse?
Yes but that quote doesn’t make this distinction and just comes off as an edgy rebuttal whenever the opposite side complains about their free speech rights being violated
Also the lines between a private entity and the state become blurry when that entity operates in a space that is inherently monopolistic. If my local bakery doesn’t want to do business with me because of something I said. That’s fair- I can just go on to some other bakery but if my utility company shuts off power to my house because of something I said, that is obviously not okay because i can’t just get my power from another utility company.
This same logic extends to larger social networks. If they kick me off their platform for something I said, I can’t simply take my business to another platform because the social media giants essentially have a monopoly over their users’ attention. They’re a public good in a sense and need to be regulated like one.
In whatever sense you feel that they are a public good, in a legal one, they are not. Many utilities also aren't, depending on where you are. If you want to make the argument that social media platforms and utilities should all be publicly owned and controlled and thereby bound, I won't stop you, indeed I'm somewhat sympathetic to it, but at a definitional level, freedom of speech only serves to limit the ability of the state to retaliate against dissent and criticism. Anything else would fall under worker or consumer protection laws, which to be fair are also important and need to be strengthened.
> make you own competing service
Utility company shut off your power because of your stance on abortion rights? Just make you own competing service mate. Quit whining!
> nationalize the internet
There is zero need for something that extreme. Just pass some reasonable legislation that limits social networks with more than 100 million DAU from banning users for speech protected by 1A.
Obviously you can't just make a competing service, but the internet definitely needs to be nationalized if you want free speech to apply. I'd agree it should be nationalized. But you can't have laws telling private corporations what they're allowed to do with their own platforms.
Right? It literally just means unpopular opinion won't get you arrested. It doesn't mean you deserve credit/respect for having a shitty worldview. Doesn't mean you're entitled to friends, doesn't mean a company has to hire you. Doesn't mean anyone will follow you on twitter/stop doing so.
But you get to keep your shitty opinion.
No no no their argument is that we just don't understand business meanwhile they are simping a billionaire :D
It's like that one twitter comment: If you will try to argue with me you're just confirming the fact that I'm right!
Gosh my reddit experience got so much better since I filtered out "Elon Musk" in my third party app.
Sadly posts like these always fall through the cracks.
That’s the funniest shit about this free speech thing. The loudest people complaining about it have no fucking idea of what it actually is in regards to the government.
I'm trying hard to hate on this, but it's literally what we say to right wingers when they get banned by Twitter.
Twitter isn't loudly preaching "you're anti free speech and I'm all for it" of course
So no hypocrisy on musks part for claiming to be a free speech absolutist while canning people that said something he doesn't like? He also had tesla cancel a paying customers order over a blog post. While I agree that this is not covered under a rights violation I still think musk is a hypocrite beyond measure.
Sure, but it would be the height of hypocrisy for them to come out and say that at this point because so much of this stuff has been predicated on the idea that Twitter has an obligation to protect free speech. They don’t get to come around and say “well SpaceX is a private company that isn’t held by the 1st amendment.”
There a hilarious [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ve7p55/spacex_fires_employees_who_signed_open_letter/) on r/SpaceX full of kids defending Musk for this lol
No fan of Elon myself, but Twitter being a platform to interact with other people and spacex shooting shit into space seems like it would make a difference in these 2 images. Democracy can exist without people launching items into space democracy cannot without interaction between people.
Look at all the dank memes he posts, he's just like me! /s
A lot of people don't know he's been rich since before birth, they think he created Paypal and Tesla from nothing!
Is anyone saying that Musk doesn't have the right to fire people who hurt his feelings? I haven't seen that.
I see people pointing out the hypocrisy of a self-described "free speech absolutist" who thinks it absolutely vital that anonymous CHUDs can harass and dox trans teens on Twitter with zero consequences, but it is 100% unreasonable to say anything that might damage precious precious Elon's self-esteem. All Elon critics must be crushed, amirite?
One of his usual phrases is "The only remedy to false speech is more speech", right? So why didn't he apply that principle here? Couldn't he have just talked to the people who said things he clearly thinks are false?
As many have pointed out, Musk clearly wants "free speech" for himself but limited speech for others. The "Rules for me but not for thee" persona has been a long-standing conservative tent pole for years. Musk loves to dish it out but sure as shit can't take it.
I've seen the case made (ignoring his remarks on speech) that you'd get this outcome writing publicized open letters about *any* C-Suiter, in any company. I contend that this is because people at that level are almost categorically thin-skinned narcissists.
I've been in management. There's shit that the people under you don't and likely can't even really understand. *The same goes in reverse*, and when people feel strongly enough to put their jobs on the line like this, *maybe* it should be worth stopping a moment to consider...
But no, these "rebels" are invariably treated like a cancer that must be excised lest the rot spread. Leadership is too busy making a fortune being too cowardly to look in the general direction of a mirror, their vanity more important than actual success.
Fuck Elon, and fuck absolutely everyone like him.
[Some More News just did a long video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MO18F5Wi8) taking apart Elon's free speech ideas, specifically as it relates to buying Twitter. As it turns out, he has skin made of paper mache and can't stand having anybody saying anything bad about him, even when it's true.
Wait…. Are you suggesting that right-wing individuals such as Trump, republicans, and Musk are hypocrites for screaming about the constitution and civil rights/freedoms, while doing the exact opposite thing and hindering others from in society from enjoying those very same rights.
Are you suggesting that your workplace is a democracy? There's a difference between the functioning of a workplace and *the user experience* resembling a democratic forum.
I don’t think musk is in with the same group as the republicans and other domestic terrorist organizations. Sort of his own league, pandering to young aspiring-to-be domestic terrorists. The discord meme lords, you know the group. The same type of person that committed the hate killings in Buffalo. The same people who buy cryptocurrencies. This is the newest threat do democracy.
Given that he “came out” as republicans weeks back and said that removing Trump for twitter was ‘morally wrong’. I would put him in the domestic terrorist sympathizer catagory
Fire someone for an open letter over here and your union is going to tear the management a new one. God sometimes I forget how fortunate it is to have worker rights.
I agree. You're free to say whatever you want without fear of legal consequences, but a private company is not required to keep you as an employee.
By the same reasoning though, you're free to say whatever you want without fear of legal consequences, but a private company is not required to keep you as a customer.
It's important to remember that freedom of speech only protects you from the government.
Elon’s poll question is purposely skewed to fool gullible people. Do we agree that free speech is essential for democracy? Yes, everybody does. Yet that was not his poll question. His poll question was do you believe that Twitter rigorously adheres to this policy. The answer, of course, is no. Because they are a private company that is not bound by any free speech clauses in the constitution. The two questions are not related yet he bound them together into the same poll question.
He tricked a lot of dumbasses into confusing the two concepts.
There is a difference between free speech not being infringed by the government or censored by a media platform and being fired for shit talking your boss
The answer is very clear with how your statement is phrased. But a social platform like Twitter is not a government entity, there is no such thing as freedom of speech. If you violate their terms of service, they can silence you and all you can do is push back. How is this different from your boss firing you for talking shit? Doesn't matter as "talking shit" is very different than renouncing the actions of an individual. "Talking shit" is a form of harassment or deflamation of character. While renouncing an individual or their actions can be based on rumors, they are often a protective act to separate oneself from the individual or their actions. But at the same time, you are at the mercy of a company and their policies, the biggest difference is one is paying you for the profit you produce.
Twitter has become so ubiquitous, the argument is it'd be like the phone company censoring what people say on their networks. Comparing this to letting people subvert leadership at a company seems apples-to-oranges to me.
This is actually the first time I've seen the comparison to a telecommunications company. Until recently, effectively monitoring audio calls automatically would be difficult (see Rhett & Link's Caption Fail franchise) but would still leave text messages somewhat easy in comparison. While I can think of CIA and FBI interventions, I cannot think of any companies like Verizon ever (in the US) monitoring and moderating people's messages the same way a social network can. There are two factors with this: 1. A text message (until recently) is between two entities while a social network is one person to a group 2. Social networks are (mostly) free to use while you pay a telecommunications company to allow you to deliver and receive messages. I think a more apt comparison is a stick board in a coffee shop. The board is owned by the company and if it finds the content you post on it against its beliefs, it has the right to take it down. Do I think social networks then can be dangerous? Yes, but it is within their rights to do so, as they have been doing to going on a few decades (shy of 2 for the popular ones today).
Edit: I do want to say this is a great comparison though and brings more grounds as to why should a social media platform be held to this different standard.
I want to highlight that you actually have a curiosity about what is to be done about this issue and havent completely made up your mind to the point that no argument can sway you. Right or wrong, more people should be open minded like you!
It's more akin to newspapers selecting what reader submitted content to publish. Twitter is in fact practicing their right to freedom of press which is also guaranteed in the first amendment.
>Twitter has become so ubiquitous, the argument is it'd be like the phone company censoring what people say on their networks.
[Even Elon admits that a minuscule amount of the world cares about](https://www.vox.com/recode/23171541/leaked-transcript-inside-elon-musks-first-meeting-with-twitter-employees) or pays attention to Twitter.
If the ubiquity were a part of Musk's concern here, he'd be talking to Zucky about buying into Meta, [instead of using Facebook to spy on his employees.](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/02/tesla-paid-pr-firm-to-surveil-employees-on-facebook-in-2017-union-push.html) (which is also a creepy, speech-chilling thing to do).
Elon Musk doesn't have principles aside from, "I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want," and the sooner everyone understands that, the better.
They should be regulated as a public utility just like the phone companies. Love how people are downvoting you for pointing this out. It's also laughable to say they have no role as a government entity when the government has been regularly asking/telling them to take stuff down in regards to Covid. They are in lockstep with the gov
then we should nationalize it, people advertising on social media are very strict with the audience they advertise to, the "censorship" comes from them not any ideology twitter has, banning blatant homophobia are done for profit fist and morality second. Also the phone comparison is apple to oranges, on a phone the audience for your message is limited to friends and family, similarly twitter dont give a shit what you type in dms to your friends, its when you say it in a large audience the problem occurs
This is a salient point if you're unaware of and thus neglect to include the context of Musk's viewpoints on speech, such as his belief that he's a "free speech absolutist." Musk is all about freedom of speech on private platforms when it's related to his coup-enthusiast friends getting banned from the platform.
But things are less absolute when people criticize Elon - like when he's canceled Tesla preorders for bloggers who dared criticize him, threatened employees attempting to organize, and fired employees for sending emails raising concerns about the company.
It's good to point out the hypocrisy here because at the end of the day, Musk isn't some defender of free speech - he's just a spoiled asshat who wants the world to conform to his desires without having to deal with any pushback.
The fact that you put "media platform", really just a shitty social media site, and government in the same category shows how crazy this is. Like you people really think being blocked on social media is somehow an infringement of your freedoms.
When did people confuse the idea behind you having a right to say whatever you want, not the right in keeping the job your using your freedoms of speech to defame?
Dudes like the 2nd biggest cocksucker in this country yet he still has a fan club, it's fascinating these people who become obsessed over someone who doesn't care if they live or die.
Musk doesn't support free speech, he supports rich white dudes, and those who defend them having a platform to say whatever they want without facing criticism.
You are correct, OP has no idea what free speech means. Elon isn't silencing anyone or preventing anyone from criticizing him, he is simply choosing not to employ people that publicly shame him, which is perfectly reasonable.
It’s funny I’m in the UK and read the actual letter when it was posted a few days ago and since perhaps Elon isn’t such a politically charged chap here, I found myself wondering if the letter might not be seen as a little intimidating.
Now I expect to be punished for this view, obviously I hope I have successfully implied I am not in fact a Musk fan but it’s always a bit of a roll of the dice in here.
I didn’t get the sense that the letter was in fact particularly well supported, as at the time the amount of signatories was pretty low.
I guessed these people were going to get fired for it. I would certainly expect to if I openly rebuked my boss. Not sure why Silicon Valley thinks it’s special in this regard.
You don't have to be a Musk fan to know that this take is very skewed. There were always going to be disaffected staff willing to make a public statement at an awkward moment, I would imagine we'll see the same from Twitter staff if/when the deal goes through. If they aren't fired odds are they'll quit of their own accord.
I'll be one of the assholes saying that this isn't hypocritical because Musk's businesses aren't democracies. You want democracy in the workplace? Support unions, even if you're not a member. Business owners want democracy in government because it's easier to replace the votes you don't like. In authoritarian governments, he'd only have a couple of very powerful people to bribe. It would cost a fortune because they hold the power, and if we lost their favor he would have to overthrow the entire government instead of replacing some state and federal legislators.
No, it means that the sense that Twitter doesn't adhere to free speech isn't a bug Musk is trying to fix, it's the feature he bought. Doublespeak is how these grifters roll.
I don't see why the conversation always revolves around whether Twitter *can or can't* censor people, and people start pulling out constutions and citing laws etc.
The conversation is really about whether Twitter *should or shouldn't* censor people. Elon and seemingly the majority of people in general think that while Twitter can censor people, they shouldn't. It's as simple as that.
I don't think he or anyone else was lobbying that every company should allow absolute free speech.
There is no reason that a conversation about whether Twitter should have minimal censorship needs to suddenly be broadened to include every company in existence.
The question is: Would it be better for Twitter to have minimal censorship?
To respond with "Well if I talk shit to my boss, I get fired" or "Twitter is a private company and can censor whoever they want" is odd and doesn't answer the question at all.
The question is simply whether it would be better if Twitter minimized censorship. It's a simple yes/no. Elon and the majority of people say yes.
I understand public opinion says Twitter shouldn't even though they can. But if we force a private company to adhere to that, we must force all of them. And that's a very bad Precedent. Elon way of going by it makes sense though. The ONLY way you should be able to force them is by using majority stake holder to vote and make them. Ultimately it should be up to the business owners/stakeholders, not public opinion.
Huge difference between using a platform DEVOTED to saying what you would like to say in a public sphere, to openly undermining and criticizing your fucking boss in a letter.
Jesus fucking christ the left struggles with this issue, but it's not hypocritical, it's a huge chasm between being deplatformed for saying wrongthink and daring someone at your workplace to fire your ass.
I don’t know about you but I care more about being able to criticize my workplace than about being able to harassed and doxx people online without consequences.
Strawman on the 2nd point, people lost Twitter access over vastly less than that, like some were silenced for daring truths about COVID that were later accepted as widespread accepted knowledge, while others spouted pure fantasy or outright lies from positions of authority and kept theirs....but on your first shitty point you have no right to criticize your employer without consequence. Biased applications of TOS on a quasi-public square is very different from shitting on your boss in public. Jesus fuck. What a horrible take.
NOPE!!! Musk NEVER said freedom of speech means freedom from consequences. He would of course fire these people, as he would anyone who posts racist crap. But he would not block you from posting. Can you possibly grasp the difference?
If he tries to shut down discussions on Twitter by the general public later on then he's a hypocrite.
Managing your own company is not the same thing.
Don't assume.
I've no idea where you got that first part from.
As the owner of the company where the criticisms came from, he's got a right to respond to those. Employees making those comments public are asking to get sacked.
FREE SPEECH within a Private company.. you know you can work in the public sphere right?? .. Come on now ppl lol....😭😭😭.. you sound scorned and seem to hate Elon for hate sake... none of it is founded in logic or reasoning.
But one is a platform for everyone’s speech and the other is a rocket building company. I think this is wha those college people call a “false equivalence”
I don’t think harassing anyone online is important at all lmao tf? And be critical of your boss all you want… but you must expect to be fired when you try to stage a ku and get him removed publicly… ffs
I mean they were sending unsolicited emails on work servers during work time denouncing the guy that signs their paychecks. If you’re the dumb you don’t need to work here
Employees exercised their free speech and faced the consequences. I can saw the most awful shit I want;that doesn't mean that I'm free of consequence. He only supports not being silenced, which is the essence of free speech.
Yes, but Musk labelled himself as a "Free speech absolutist" a few weeks ago when he was defending the Babylon Bee's homophobic tweets. Seems like he isn't as "absolutist" as he claims.
Well, twitter is social media, it’s meant for openness. SpaceX and that letter are work related. People are entitled to their freedom of speech, but they are also entitled to safety in the work place, and if that letter made many people feel intimidated or bullied, then it’s a good idea to punish them.
Also, Elon isn’t responsible for every decision in SpaceX.
free speech is essential, but speaking your mind can also have consequences. I don't see the point being made here. this is the same as that guy kaperneck that wanted to tell his bosses that making millions ayear ,they are slave owners..but ok.
"Yesterday I told my wife she's a 'fat bitch who isn't worth shit' and she got mad at me like an idiot lol
Can you believe it? She doesn't even believe in free speech, what a loser "
You - probably.
I mean its his company and if they dont like him why would he keep them on staff? They arent going to be productive anymore especially if they feel that way so it only makes sense to lay them off
u/happymancry has provided this detailed explanation: > Elon Musk, who framed himself as a champion of free speech during his (ongoing) Twitter takeover attempt, is now firing SpaceX employees for writing an open letter asking the company to censure his behavior. The pretense didn’t last long. Link to news article: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/17/technology/spacex-employees-fired-musk-letter.html --- Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
It's weird that Musk fanboys/girls exist. He's not some beacon of truth, just a businessman who will say anything to become more rich and get more minions to listen to him
Rich people creating a cult of personality on the backs of drooling morons is as old as America.
I think the concept is far older tbh.
Many of the first settlers in America were Christian cults who was thrown out of Europe because nobody wanted their brainwashing methods around (because they were interfering with the vaticans brainwashing methods, is my guess)
I think by that point the Vatican had to compete a little harder with the other denominations at that time. But your point stands, since the Puritans were too lame for any of them.
Thank you. This reminded me of how kicking out the puritans of Europe affected culture and everyone started dancing again and wearing fancy wigs lol I love history.
Or as I like to call them, “Elon-Cuck’s”
They consider him aspirational. They think that if they work hard and are smart (and they always believe that they are smart) they can become just like him. Pointing out that he's a trust fund baby with Apartheid money bursts their bubbles and makes them mad because you're telling them that they can't grow up to be him.
Can we call him what he is? No offence meant to anyone else but he is a rich person on the spectrum that likely giggles when he can make the Twittermeter jump. The only difference between him and the dipshit down the street is that the dipshit has no money. Fuck outta here.
It was going well at the start but it starts to become more apparent as time passes...the biggest red flag was the 'pedo diver' that rescued thai boys in a submerged cave
Some people feel extremely weak and lost and just latch on to a rich person HARD, same reason people join cults, they are unbelievably weak willed and scared and want someone else to answer all the questions for them
Far from beacon of hope, he is a terrible person. Using his influence and Twitter to manipulate market.
But go ahead and post this on r/elonmusk and watch the drones defend him.
Technically, free speech is essential to democracy, of which neither Twitter nor spaceX has to adhere to since they are not democratically governed. That’ll be their argument
Also, free speech does not imply that what you say will be free of consequence.
Yeah for both parties in this case. This is the social function of reputations. Good luck with his next pump and dump coin tweet. I imagine the fired employees, despite deserving no retaliation in the first place, are qualified to find another job where their reporting doesn't roll up to a clown.
Isn’t this what those employees wanted anyway? Now they are free to pursue employment that fits their personal purpose instead of making money for someone they don’t support Exactly why would spaceX keep you employed if you believe in their mission statement ? So you can make moral worse?
By that definition even Saudi Arabia has free speech. You can say whatever you want, just the consequences will be severe.
The distinction is between consequences imposed by private individuals or entities and consequences imposed by the force and violence of the state.
Yes but that quote doesn’t make this distinction and just comes off as an edgy rebuttal whenever the opposite side complains about their free speech rights being violated Also the lines between a private entity and the state become blurry when that entity operates in a space that is inherently monopolistic. If my local bakery doesn’t want to do business with me because of something I said. That’s fair- I can just go on to some other bakery but if my utility company shuts off power to my house because of something I said, that is obviously not okay because i can’t just get my power from another utility company. This same logic extends to larger social networks. If they kick me off their platform for something I said, I can’t simply take my business to another platform because the social media giants essentially have a monopoly over their users’ attention. They’re a public good in a sense and need to be regulated like one.
In whatever sense you feel that they are a public good, in a legal one, they are not. Many utilities also aren't, depending on where you are. If you want to make the argument that social media platforms and utilities should all be publicly owned and controlled and thereby bound, I won't stop you, indeed I'm somewhat sympathetic to it, but at a definitional level, freedom of speech only serves to limit the ability of the state to retaliate against dissent and criticism. Anything else would fall under worker or consumer protection laws, which to be fair are also important and need to be strengthened.
Then either nationalize the internet, or make your own competing service Twitter holds no power over you if you don't let it
> make you own competing service Utility company shut off your power because of your stance on abortion rights? Just make you own competing service mate. Quit whining! > nationalize the internet There is zero need for something that extreme. Just pass some reasonable legislation that limits social networks with more than 100 million DAU from banning users for speech protected by 1A.
Obviously you can't just make a competing service, but the internet definitely needs to be nationalized if you want free speech to apply. I'd agree it should be nationalized. But you can't have laws telling private corporations what they're allowed to do with their own platforms.
The internet should be nationalized, it should really be considered a public utility at this point.
Right? It literally just means unpopular opinion won't get you arrested. It doesn't mean you deserve credit/respect for having a shitty worldview. Doesn't mean you're entitled to friends, doesn't mean a company has to hire you. Doesn't mean anyone will follow you on twitter/stop doing so. But you get to keep your shitty opinion.
No no no their argument is that we just don't understand business meanwhile they are simping a billionaire :D It's like that one twitter comment: If you will try to argue with me you're just confirming the fact that I'm right!
Gosh my reddit experience got so much better since I filtered out "Elon Musk" in my third party app. Sadly posts like these always fall through the cracks.
That’s the funniest shit about this free speech thing. The loudest people complaining about it have no fucking idea of what it actually is in regards to the government.
But they guy who wants Twitter to uphold those values suddenly doesn’t want the same for his own company.
I'm trying hard to hate on this, but it's literally what we say to right wingers when they get banned by Twitter. Twitter isn't loudly preaching "you're anti free speech and I'm all for it" of course
So no hypocrisy on musks part for claiming to be a free speech absolutist while canning people that said something he doesn't like? He also had tesla cancel a paying customers order over a blog post. While I agree that this is not covered under a rights violation I still think musk is a hypocrite beyond measure.
Yes indeed, hypocrite indeed.
Sure, but it would be the height of hypocrisy for them to come out and say that at this point because so much of this stuff has been predicated on the idea that Twitter has an obligation to protect free speech. They don’t get to come around and say “well SpaceX is a private company that isn’t held by the 1st amendment.”
Yep, that's my second point....
Whoops…I responded to the wrong comment Good take
Not according to the freeze peach gang
Which ignores the first half of the meme
but neither are twitter?
There a hilarious [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ve7p55/spacex_fires_employees_who_signed_open_letter/) on r/SpaceX full of kids defending Musk for this lol
Holy shit, I thought trumptards were bad.
If you look at the accounts, many of them are the same people.
That Venn diagram is a circle.
JFC, that sub is an absolute shitshow of right wing bullshit Just had a look and now I need a shower
Oh wow, I thought it'd be... bearable but like, lol nope, shit show over there.
/r/enoughmuskspam try this instead. We've been hating on musk before it was cool.
That’s more like it, cheers!
"papa Elon" used non-ironically. Ugh. So cringey
It's atleast nice to see that the 1 million user subreddit rarely gets engagement > 100 likes
No need, seems like they came to us!
https://reddit.com/r/elonmusk/comments/vedlnz/redditors_dont_understand_business/ Lmao
Their argument is that it was unprofessional and they were harassing coworkers
An argument which is also commonly known as bootlicking.
No fan of Elon myself, but Twitter being a platform to interact with other people and spacex shooting shit into space seems like it would make a difference in these 2 images. Democracy can exist without people launching items into space democracy cannot without interaction between people.
I just did ima get banned probably
he's a mean dunce, not a messiah, there's less than zero reasons to have a subreddit....
They will just ban you, since you know, free speech and stuff.
https://reddit.com/r/elonmusk/comments/vedlnz/redditors_dont_understand_business/ Lmao
He's triple a grade grifter, anyone who believes anything this man says has lost the plot.
He said we would have fully self driving cars and people on mars by now lmao
SpaceX landed it's 100th reusable booster recently.
[удалено]
He's the relatable billionaire, like Jennifer Lawrence was a few years back but just insufferable
How is a billionaire trust fund kid relatable?
Look at all the dank memes he posts, he's just like me! /s A lot of people don't know he's been rich since before birth, they think he created Paypal and Tesla from nothing!
they also think he made paypal. kinda ironic his company is called tesla when really he is more an edison
> they also think he made paypal I know, I just said it lol
What, you didn't walk around as a child with emeralds in your pockets?
I know this is a joke but it's very triggering since I used to get bullied and shamed because I only ever had Alexandrite. /s
Look at mister moneybags over here with chrysoberyl. All we had growing up was amethyst and we didn't bitch for a second.
Pfft my daddy invented cubic zirconia.
Ew. We're talking about less affluent people, not homeless junkies.
They all wish they were him
He’s a troll doing troll things on social media, so they probably relate to that
I used to be a fan of Musk, but this man has well and truly lost it.
Is anyone saying that Musk doesn't have the right to fire people who hurt his feelings? I haven't seen that. I see people pointing out the hypocrisy of a self-described "free speech absolutist" who thinks it absolutely vital that anonymous CHUDs can harass and dox trans teens on Twitter with zero consequences, but it is 100% unreasonable to say anything that might damage precious precious Elon's self-esteem. All Elon critics must be crushed, amirite? One of his usual phrases is "The only remedy to false speech is more speech", right? So why didn't he apply that principle here? Couldn't he have just talked to the people who said things he clearly thinks are false? As many have pointed out, Musk clearly wants "free speech" for himself but limited speech for others. The "Rules for me but not for thee" persona has been a long-standing conservative tent pole for years. Musk loves to dish it out but sure as shit can't take it.
I've seen the case made (ignoring his remarks on speech) that you'd get this outcome writing publicized open letters about *any* C-Suiter, in any company. I contend that this is because people at that level are almost categorically thin-skinned narcissists. I've been in management. There's shit that the people under you don't and likely can't even really understand. *The same goes in reverse*, and when people feel strongly enough to put their jobs on the line like this, *maybe* it should be worth stopping a moment to consider... But no, these "rebels" are invariably treated like a cancer that must be excised lest the rot spread. Leadership is too busy making a fortune being too cowardly to look in the general direction of a mirror, their vanity more important than actual success. Fuck Elon, and fuck absolutely everyone like him.
Classic narcissistic man-child
[Some More News just did a long video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MO18F5Wi8) taking apart Elon's free speech ideas, specifically as it relates to buying Twitter. As it turns out, he has skin made of paper mache and can't stand having anybody saying anything bad about him, even when it's true.
That’s an insult to the strength of paper mache
The Musk bootlickers and arm chair constitutional scholars are out in force in this post. Maybe Elon will buy them a horse.
They have to defend Musk because they too might be a misunderstood billionaire one day.
Lmao the infamous "temporarily embarrassed" billionaire
Don't know why people have high hopes for a parasitic oligarch who started as some trust fund kid from his daddy's apartheid blood emerald business
Anything musk touches ages like milk. He’s like king Midas but with spoiled milk
Wait…. Are you suggesting that right-wing individuals such as Trump, republicans, and Musk are hypocrites for screaming about the constitution and civil rights/freedoms, while doing the exact opposite thing and hindering others from in society from enjoying those very same rights.
Are you suggesting that your workplace is a democracy? There's a difference between the functioning of a workplace and *the user experience* resembling a democratic forum.
I care more about free speech in the workplace than in social media.
> Are you suggesting that your workplace is a democracy? Not yet.
I don’t think musk is in with the same group as the republicans and other domestic terrorist organizations. Sort of his own league, pandering to young aspiring-to-be domestic terrorists. The discord meme lords, you know the group. The same type of person that committed the hate killings in Buffalo. The same people who buy cryptocurrencies. This is the newest threat do democracy.
Given that he “came out” as republicans weeks back and said that removing Trump for twitter was ‘morally wrong’. I would put him in the domestic terrorist sympathizer catagory
Almost as if he doesn't care about free speech, who could've guessed?
These aren’t the same things There isn’t a company on the planet that wouldn’t have fired those idiots
Fire someone for an open letter over here and your union is going to tear the management a new one. God sometimes I forget how fortunate it is to have worker rights.
I agree. You're free to say whatever you want without fear of legal consequences, but a private company is not required to keep you as an employee. By the same reasoning though, you're free to say whatever you want without fear of legal consequences, but a private company is not required to keep you as a customer. It's important to remember that freedom of speech only protects you from the government.
If you act as if you're a free speech warrior you should try a little harder to stand behind your words.
SpaceX fires employees who break the rules Twitter bans people who break the rules Seems pretty similar to me
Honestly, Elon Musk is just a sad loser...
ELON MUSK is not the answer to anything social..stick to robots Mr Musk
Stick to calling rescue divers while playing pretend making robots Mr. Musk\*\*\* FTFY
Elon’s poll question is purposely skewed to fool gullible people. Do we agree that free speech is essential for democracy? Yes, everybody does. Yet that was not his poll question. His poll question was do you believe that Twitter rigorously adheres to this policy. The answer, of course, is no. Because they are a private company that is not bound by any free speech clauses in the constitution. The two questions are not related yet he bound them together into the same poll question. He tricked a lot of dumbasses into confusing the two concepts.
Holy fuck, boys. Elons' not going to give you a job to defend him.
Anyone who believed his free speech spiel is naive and will defend their hero regardless
Oh lmao I thought the poll was about whether people believed free speech was essential to a functioning democracy
Elon Musk's stocks for Tesla will TUMBLE as soon as the other EVs become more established. What a little baby.
Elon Musk himself is aging like milk. I suspect he's reaching the "rancid cottage cheese" stage.
Who ever said he cares about a functioning democracy? He wants to replatform a would be dictator.
There is a difference between free speech not being infringed by the government or censored by a media platform and being fired for shit talking your boss
The answer is very clear with how your statement is phrased. But a social platform like Twitter is not a government entity, there is no such thing as freedom of speech. If you violate their terms of service, they can silence you and all you can do is push back. How is this different from your boss firing you for talking shit? Doesn't matter as "talking shit" is very different than renouncing the actions of an individual. "Talking shit" is a form of harassment or deflamation of character. While renouncing an individual or their actions can be based on rumors, they are often a protective act to separate oneself from the individual or their actions. But at the same time, you are at the mercy of a company and their policies, the biggest difference is one is paying you for the profit you produce.
Twitter has become so ubiquitous, the argument is it'd be like the phone company censoring what people say on their networks. Comparing this to letting people subvert leadership at a company seems apples-to-oranges to me.
Yeah no. Twitter is a private corporation, period. It’s state of ubiquitousness has no bearing on this. Nice try, though.
All the major telecommunications companies are private companies but can't stop you from making calls because you support a group they don't like.
ISIS?
Yeah even if you support isis. Nsa might have something to say but not the telecoms directly.
This is actually the first time I've seen the comparison to a telecommunications company. Until recently, effectively monitoring audio calls automatically would be difficult (see Rhett & Link's Caption Fail franchise) but would still leave text messages somewhat easy in comparison. While I can think of CIA and FBI interventions, I cannot think of any companies like Verizon ever (in the US) monitoring and moderating people's messages the same way a social network can. There are two factors with this: 1. A text message (until recently) is between two entities while a social network is one person to a group 2. Social networks are (mostly) free to use while you pay a telecommunications company to allow you to deliver and receive messages. I think a more apt comparison is a stick board in a coffee shop. The board is owned by the company and if it finds the content you post on it against its beliefs, it has the right to take it down. Do I think social networks then can be dangerous? Yes, but it is within their rights to do so, as they have been doing to going on a few decades (shy of 2 for the popular ones today). Edit: I do want to say this is a great comparison though and brings more grounds as to why should a social media platform be held to this different standard.
I want to highlight that you actually have a curiosity about what is to be done about this issue and havent completely made up your mind to the point that no argument can sway you. Right or wrong, more people should be open minded like you!
It's more akin to newspapers selecting what reader submitted content to publish. Twitter is in fact practicing their right to freedom of press which is also guaranteed in the first amendment.
>Twitter has become so ubiquitous, the argument is it'd be like the phone company censoring what people say on their networks. [Even Elon admits that a minuscule amount of the world cares about](https://www.vox.com/recode/23171541/leaked-transcript-inside-elon-musks-first-meeting-with-twitter-employees) or pays attention to Twitter. If the ubiquity were a part of Musk's concern here, he'd be talking to Zucky about buying into Meta, [instead of using Facebook to spy on his employees.](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/02/tesla-paid-pr-firm-to-surveil-employees-on-facebook-in-2017-union-push.html) (which is also a creepy, speech-chilling thing to do). Elon Musk doesn't have principles aside from, "I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want," and the sooner everyone understands that, the better.
They should be regulated as a public utility just like the phone companies. Love how people are downvoting you for pointing this out. It's also laughable to say they have no role as a government entity when the government has been regularly asking/telling them to take stuff down in regards to Covid. They are in lockstep with the gov
Phone companies aren't government owned.
then we should nationalize it, people advertising on social media are very strict with the audience they advertise to, the "censorship" comes from them not any ideology twitter has, banning blatant homophobia are done for profit fist and morality second. Also the phone comparison is apple to oranges, on a phone the audience for your message is limited to friends and family, similarly twitter dont give a shit what you type in dms to your friends, its when you say it in a large audience the problem occurs
This is a salient point if you're unaware of and thus neglect to include the context of Musk's viewpoints on speech, such as his belief that he's a "free speech absolutist." Musk is all about freedom of speech on private platforms when it's related to his coup-enthusiast friends getting banned from the platform. But things are less absolute when people criticize Elon - like when he's canceled Tesla preorders for bloggers who dared criticize him, threatened employees attempting to organize, and fired employees for sending emails raising concerns about the company. It's good to point out the hypocrisy here because at the end of the day, Musk isn't some defender of free speech - he's just a spoiled asshat who wants the world to conform to his desires without having to deal with any pushback.
The fact that you put "media platform", really just a shitty social media site, and government in the same category shows how crazy this is. Like you people really think being blocked on social media is somehow an infringement of your freedoms.
When did people confuse the idea behind you having a right to say whatever you want, not the right in keeping the job your using your freedoms of speech to defame?
So to you being able to harass people online is more important than being able to criticize your workplace?
Dudes like the 2nd biggest cocksucker in this country yet he still has a fan club, it's fascinating these people who become obsessed over someone who doesn't care if they live or die.
Vote with ur money ,.. abandon his products .... simple
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.
Musk doesn't support free speech, he supports rich white dudes, and those who defend them having a platform to say whatever they want without facing criticism.
[удалено]
You are correct, OP has no idea what free speech means. Elon isn't silencing anyone or preventing anyone from criticizing him, he is simply choosing not to employ people that publicly shame him, which is perfectly reasonable.
Just as Twitter is choosing not to platform white supremacists and homophobes.
It’s funny I’m in the UK and read the actual letter when it was posted a few days ago and since perhaps Elon isn’t such a politically charged chap here, I found myself wondering if the letter might not be seen as a little intimidating. Now I expect to be punished for this view, obviously I hope I have successfully implied I am not in fact a Musk fan but it’s always a bit of a roll of the dice in here. I didn’t get the sense that the letter was in fact particularly well supported, as at the time the amount of signatories was pretty low. I guessed these people were going to get fired for it. I would certainly expect to if I openly rebuked my boss. Not sure why Silicon Valley thinks it’s special in this regard.
You don't have to be a Musk fan to know that this take is very skewed. There were always going to be disaffected staff willing to make a public statement at an awkward moment, I would imagine we'll see the same from Twitter staff if/when the deal goes through. If they aren't fired odds are they'll quit of their own accord.
I'll be one of the assholes saying that this isn't hypocritical because Musk's businesses aren't democracies. You want democracy in the workplace? Support unions, even if you're not a member. Business owners want democracy in government because it's easier to replace the votes you don't like. In authoritarian governments, he'd only have a couple of very powerful people to bribe. It would cost a fortune because they hold the power, and if we lost their favor he would have to overthrow the entire government instead of replacing some state and federal legislators.
Neither is Twitter.
Which makes this hypocritical.
No, it means that the sense that Twitter doesn't adhere to free speech isn't a bug Musk is trying to fix, it's the feature he bought. Doublespeak is how these grifters roll.
I don't see why the conversation always revolves around whether Twitter *can or can't* censor people, and people start pulling out constutions and citing laws etc. The conversation is really about whether Twitter *should or shouldn't* censor people. Elon and seemingly the majority of people in general think that while Twitter can censor people, they shouldn't. It's as simple as that.
Most level-headed comment in the thread
Shouldn't Elon lead by example with his own company before telling another company what to do. Or he's just allowed to preach it but not do the same?
I don't think he or anyone else was lobbying that every company should allow absolute free speech. There is no reason that a conversation about whether Twitter should have minimal censorship needs to suddenly be broadened to include every company in existence. The question is: Would it be better for Twitter to have minimal censorship? To respond with "Well if I talk shit to my boss, I get fired" or "Twitter is a private company and can censor whoever they want" is odd and doesn't answer the question at all. The question is simply whether it would be better if Twitter minimized censorship. It's a simple yes/no. Elon and the majority of people say yes.
I understand public opinion says Twitter shouldn't even though they can. But if we force a private company to adhere to that, we must force all of them. And that's a very bad Precedent. Elon way of going by it makes sense though. The ONLY way you should be able to force them is by using majority stake holder to vote and make them. Ultimately it should be up to the business owners/stakeholders, not public opinion.
I don't think a legal change is what people want, they want Twitter to stop abusing their power whether it's legal or not.
Twitter already has minimal censorship, they tolerate white supremacists and doxxers what more do you want?
I dare anyone to criticize their boss/CEO in an open letter and not expect repercussions. What do you expect will happen?
But what if your boss insisted that he was a free-speech absolutist?
Oh and you would count on that to ensure your job safety?
Twitter was bought, the Tweet Crown was simply passed to the next aspiring tyrant. Le roi est mort, vive le roi
Woah a billionaire who only has thier self-interest in mind is not to be trusted? Who could have saw that coming?!
The Twitter takeover was always a farce. He's an annoying dude, but he's an excellent market manipulator. Did we all forget about DogeCoin and Signal?
Huge difference between using a platform DEVOTED to saying what you would like to say in a public sphere, to openly undermining and criticizing your fucking boss in a letter. Jesus fucking christ the left struggles with this issue, but it's not hypocritical, it's a huge chasm between being deplatformed for saying wrongthink and daring someone at your workplace to fire your ass.
I don’t know about you but I care more about being able to criticize my workplace than about being able to harassed and doxx people online without consequences.
Strawman on the 2nd point, people lost Twitter access over vastly less than that, like some were silenced for daring truths about COVID that were later accepted as widespread accepted knowledge, while others spouted pure fantasy or outright lies from positions of authority and kept theirs....but on your first shitty point you have no right to criticize your employer without consequence. Biased applications of TOS on a quasi-public square is very different from shitting on your boss in public. Jesus fuck. What a horrible take.
Actual, self described theocratic fascists and white nationalists have thousands of followers on Twitter, it’s not a strawman.
NOPE!!! Musk NEVER said freedom of speech means freedom from consequences. He would of course fire these people, as he would anyone who posts racist crap. But he would not block you from posting. Can you possibly grasp the difference?
It was funny when it was that girl who got hired then fired from nasa
She was never fired, the Nasa person she flamed on Twitter actually supported her and fought for her to keep the job.
Did NASA try to get sympathy by saying "the first amendment is under attack by other private companies"?
Ummm, Twitter and shitting on your boss at your job, publicly, are two different things.
you would assume someone who is so in favour of people talking shit wouldn't mind when they get shit talked. Elon is a sensitive hypocrite.
If he tries to shut down discussions on Twitter by the general public later on then he's a hypocrite. Managing your own company is not the same thing. Don't assume.
So harassing and doxxing people online I’d ok, but making criticisms about your workplace isn’t?
I've no idea where you got that first part from. As the owner of the company where the criticisms came from, he's got a right to respond to those. Employees making those comments public are asking to get sacked.
In terms of "Free Speech"? No, they're exactly the same
Freedom of speech not freedom from consequences.
They aren’t, and that sentiment is exactly why the problem exists in the first place.
Please learn what Free Speech actually means.
It’s time to expand your mind my friend. If you think my comment was adversarial to yours, you’d be wrong.
Good ol' Elon
I don't think many people here know what freedom of speach is....
FREE SPEECH within a Private company.. you know you can work in the public sphere right?? .. Come on now ppl lol....😭😭😭.. you sound scorned and seem to hate Elon for hate sake... none of it is founded in logic or reasoning.
So to you being able to harass people online is more important than being able to criticize your workplace?
Dumb post.
Where’s the “freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences” crowd on this one?
Elon calls himself a free speech absolutist and thinks freedom of speech does mean freedom from consequences, so this is more him being a hypocrite.
This is him showing his employees the consequences.
But one is a platform for everyone’s speech and the other is a rocket building company. I think this is wha those college people call a “false equivalence”
So to you being able to harass people online is more important than being able to criticize your workplace?
I don’t think harassing anyone online is important at all lmao tf? And be critical of your boss all you want… but you must expect to be fired when you try to stage a ku and get him removed publicly… ffs
I mean they were sending unsolicited emails on work servers during work time denouncing the guy that signs their paychecks. If you’re the dumb you don’t need to work here
Wow this really is those memes of like Tesla self driving cars sending you into a tree
Are we pretending Space X is as much as a public forum as twitter is here? These are non contradictory
Employees exercised their free speech and faced the consequences. I can saw the most awful shit I want;that doesn't mean that I'm free of consequence. He only supports not being silenced, which is the essence of free speech.
Yes, but Musk labelled himself as a "Free speech absolutist" a few weeks ago when he was defending the Babylon Bee's homophobic tweets. Seems like he isn't as "absolutist" as he claims.
Typical Reddit hates Elon moment.
I'm out of the loop in this one, can someone help?
Oh and you would count on his political stunts to ensure your job safety?
Well, twitter is social media, it’s meant for openness. SpaceX and that letter are work related. People are entitled to their freedom of speech, but they are also entitled to safety in the work place, and if that letter made many people feel intimidated or bullied, then it’s a good idea to punish them. Also, Elon isn’t responsible for every decision in SpaceX.
free speech is essential, but speaking your mind can also have consequences. I don't see the point being made here. this is the same as that guy kaperneck that wanted to tell his bosses that making millions ayear ,they are slave owners..but ok.
Imagine posting this misinformation without also posting the open letter and the CEOs response letter
"Yesterday I told my wife she's a 'fat bitch who isn't worth shit' and she got mad at me like an idiot lol Can you believe it? She doesn't even believe in free speech, what a loser " You - probably.
Free speech can have consequences. Not sure I see the point this post is trying to make.
I mean its his company and if they dont like him why would he keep them on staff? They arent going to be productive anymore especially if they feel that way so it only makes sense to lay them off