• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Elon Musk actively suppressing some anti-Trump material on X, coordinating with campaign

Axulus

Axulus

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
4,282
Location
Hallandale, FL
Basic Beliefs
Right leaning skeptic
Remember when Twitter suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story for 36 hours was outrageous election interference?

From a recent NYT article:

After a reporter’s publication of hacked Trump campaign information last month, the campaign connected with X to prevent the circulation of links to the material on the platform, according to two people with knowledge of the events. X eventually blocked links to the material and suspended the reporter’s account.
Click to expand...

https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump...her-to-suppress-reporting-on-hacked-info-nyt/
 
I'm surprised that there isn't more outrage at the plainly corrupt relationship between Trump and Musk, who aims to be an oligarch in the truest sense of the word.

He's the world's richest man whose companies have received billions in government subsidies and contracts, arguably allowing Tesla to survive in it's early years, who, in turn for supporting Trump and making the proper donations, gets to buy an onstage spot at a Trump rally and gets promised a government position by Trump where Elon Musk himself, with zero qualifications, decides what the government should and shouldn't spend money on and which regulations should be removed and then gets direct access to a president Trump to manipulate him to agree with his conclusions.

One of the ways Putin rose to power was getting a small group of corrupt oligarchs on his side, helping him rise to power and allowing him to crush Russia's fledgling democracy movement at the time. These oligarchs benefitted greatly from Putin's government in reward for their past and continuing support of him in power.
 
Last edited:
I AM NOT A LAWYER. But I vaguely recall some law that applies to certain sorts of media.

Newspapers are allowed to pick and choose what opinions they publish. Cable TV and Hollywood producers are unrestricted. IIRC broadcast radio and TV are subject to only few restrictions.

But telephone companies -- which function as a conduit -- are not allowed to censor content with political prejudice, right? Am I wrong? Or was there some sort of ruling that certain Internet channels are subject to rules similar to those imposed on telephone companies?
 
Swammerdami said:
I AM NOT A LAWYER. But I vaguely recall some law that applies to certain sorts of media.

Newspapers are allowed to pick and choose what opinions they publish. Cable TV and Hollywood producers are unrestricted. IIRC broadcast radio and TV are subject to only few restrictions.

But telephone companies -- which function as a conduit -- are not allowed to censor content with political prejudice, right? Am I wrong? Or was there some sort of ruling that certain Internet channels are subject to rules similar to those imposed on telephone companies?
Click to expand...
I don't think Shitter is regulated like a phone company.
 
Axulus said:
I'm surprised that there isn't more outrage at the plainly corrupt relationship between Trump and Musk, who aims to be an oligarch in the truest sense of the word.
Click to expand...
Because we have already lost. We are just trying to slow the bleed out.
 
Hmmm sounds like election interference. Also possibly treason considering January 6th and Trump's role in it. But don't say that, it triggers conservatives.
 
www.theguardian.com

Trump campaign worked with Musk’s X to keep leaked JD Vance file off platform

Journalist who published vetting document on Republican running mate was kicked off site formerly known as Twitter
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Journalist who published vetting document on Republican running mate was kicked off site formerly known as Twitter

Oliver Milman
Sat 12 Oct 2024 10.46 EDT



Donald Trump’s presidential campaign worked with X to prevent information about JD Vance from being posted on the social media platform, a move that resulted in the journalist who revealed the information being kicked off the site, according to reports.

The former president’s team contacted X, owned by the billionaire Trump backer Elon Musk, about a 271-page document compiled by his campaign to vet his running mate that was linked to by Ken Klippenstein, an independent journalist, the New York Times has reported.


X responded by blocking links to the material, claiming that it contained sensitive personal information such as the Ohio US senator’s social security number, and banned Klippenstein from the platform.

The materials published by Klippenstein on his Substack in September appear to be related to a hack of the Trump campaign earlier this year, which the FBI has linked to Iran. Documents from the hack have been shared with several media outlets, which have chosen to not publish them.

Media outlets did not reach the same decision when they gave significant attention to files from Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign that had been hacked and leaked by Russian intelligence before she ultimately lost that election to Trump. At one point, Trump had said he hoped Russia would be “able to find” some of Clinton’s files.


The removal of the material from X has highlighted the increasingly strident support of Musk, the world’s richest person, for Trump’s attempt to return to the White House after losing the 2020 election to Joe Biden. After buying Twitter in 2022, Musk said that he was an advocate of free speech and the open sharing of information, even if it offended either political party.
Click to expand...
 
bigfield said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Wasn't this a good thing when the owners of Twitter were doing the same in the opposite direction?
Click to expand...
That's just Conservolibertarians projecting on to liberals.
Click to expand...
I remember when progressives (not liberals) defended the actions of private corporations. Yet when Musk purchases Twitter suddenly all the arguments they used to make no longer apply.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
bigfield said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Wasn't this a good thing when the owners of Twitter were doing the same in the opposite direction?
Click to expand...
That's just Conservolibertarians projecting on to liberals.
Click to expand...
I remember when progressives (not liberals) defended the actions of private corporations. Yet when Musk purchases Twitter suddenly all the arguments they used to make no longer apply.
Click to expand...
I remember that Conservolibertarians used to demand their right to freedom of speech on privately-owned platforms, even though that right doesn't extend to private platforms.

And it was only Conservolibertarians who believed that Twitter was suppressing right wing journalism while propagating left wing misinformation. (That being the "opposite direction" of what X is doing now.)
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
bigfield said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Wasn't this a good thing when the owners of Twitter were doing the same in the opposite direction?
Click to expand...
That's just Conservolibertarians projecting on to liberals.
Click to expand...
I remember when progressives (not liberals) defended the actions of private corporations. Yet when Musk purchases Twitter suddenly all the arguments they used to make no longer apply.
Click to expand...
Musk bought it to promote free speech. Now he's removing free speech.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Wasn't this a good thing when the owners of Twitter were doing the same in the opposite direction?
Click to expand...
When the Republicans claimed the owners of Twitter were doing the same thing. They never made their case.
Click to expand...
IIRC that's exactly right. It was/is another case of them forecasting their own crimes by pre-accusing others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom