10 comments

[ 2.1 ms ] story [ 33.1 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
Reminder, Twitter (now X) is a privately owned company. Comments like "How does anyone in our government allow this nonsense?" are answered by the simple statement that the First Amendment allows companies like Twitter (X) to do these things because they are a private company.

However, that does not mean that users of the platform should not consider this a warning that the current owner--despite claiming to be a free-speech absolutist--should be trusted with their business.

> Reminder, Twitter (now X) is a privately owned company. Comments like "How does anyone in our government allow this nonsense?" are answered by the simple statement that the First Amendment allows companies like Twitter (X) to do these things because they are a private company.

Publicly traded companies are also perfectly within their rights to act in this way; private ownership has nothing to do with it.

In OP's usage, "private" meant "not owned by the government," which includes publicly-traded companies.
And the incentive for Twitter/X to behave ethically is to attract high-quality advertisers and therefore business, which is part of the reason a Trust and Safety team even exists.

Which Elon doesn't seem to care about.

Yeah, but try and have your privately owned restaurant with a sign that says "no blacks allowed" in this day and age.
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
Are you all quite sure that "How does anyone in our government allow this nonsense?" does not refer to the government's safety regulators and their alleged duty to keep cars reasonably safe?