Posting real time coordinates of people's whereabouts is an entirely different kind of 'unsafe' than someone posting an opinion or belief we don't like.
Agreed. And note that AOC was one of the first to cry about how scary J6 was for her when she was never really in harm’s way. I would also note that LibsofTikTok was kicked off but efforts to doxx the owner of the account were never taken down. Doxxing isn’t free speech - it’s just revenge, hate, and incitement of fear and violence.
Not a SINGLE one of those suspended journalists posted even a coordinate of Musk's location. They simply used the word "@elonjet" while covering the account's deactivation. Felon Musk took that to mean that they were "leading" people to that account.
Are you really that stupid? Put yourself in his shoes. The link is enough as proof of doxxing unless you are living in lala land. Doxxing should get you suspended - grow up and live with it.
So I guess Musk was living in la-la land on Nov.6 when he tweeted that he would NOT take down the plane-tracking account.
And Musk suddenly going bonkers over this has (very predictably!) resulted in the Streisand effect: there is now a 100,000-memeber reddit subgroup dedicated to tracking his plane: https://www.reddit.com/r/ElonJetTracker/
That is false. They openly and notoriously tried to get people to go to either the elonjet account or the guy's web page - so as to boost the number of people that would be knowledgeable about where to find the real time information as to where Musk was.
What they did was totally evil.
And what happened to them? They were all had their accounts restored in a few HOURS. Not the 19 months that it took to restore Libs of TikTok, or other innocents who did nothing at all wrong.
The herd of "journalists" who tried to steer people to a site which could result in Musks' assassination was appalling. They should have been banned forever.
This is a lie, using very careful language to IMPLY that the journalists did not provide Musk's real time location, by specifying coordinates as the means. Therefore Umblamb, you are a bad faith actor.
I directly linked from the very first Harwell article I looked up, to Elon Musk's private jet real time route. Harwell intended that link.
When you have to deceive to persuade people, Umblamb, this is a powerful indicator that your values will not withstand open scrutiny.
Thanks Abigail for covering this development so articulately. Musk is correct to draw a line in the sand when it comes to safety concerns around his family. Suck it up, all you folks who've been given time outs!
Today, so called "progressive policies" do anything but "promote social welfare". We must not destroy the rights of parents to protect their children. This is fundamental. And, everyone who disagrees with you is not 'against Democracy", sir. :-)
MarkS's Substack profile claims he's a "liberal" and supports "individual rights." In this case that means he supports the right of an individual who doesn't like a particular person to provide information to some unknown third party that would allow that third party to stalk and murder the disliked person and all their family members. Got it.
Listen Nancy. CAN YOU READ? Did you READ what MarkS wrote? Do you understand English? None of the reporters even provided ONE coordinate of Musk, his son, or anyone else. They simply used the word "@elonjet" while covering the news!
They did ask him. And he fleed in four minutes. Besides, not ONE of the banned journalists even remotely did anything qualifying as doxxing. They just had the word @Elonjet in their tweets. Almost all of them were commenting on the account being banned. And our genius czar took their MENTION of the banned account as doxxing.
Their accounts were to be suspended for 7 days, not banned. I heard that space- he was clear, and it was clear the journalists were in too big a tizzy to see reason.
You missed the point of doxxing. Doxxing is sharing someone else's information with strangers. The one sharing does not know for what purpose the information will be used, nor by whom.
Seems that you're missing the point. The intentions of the doxxor are irrelevant, which was my original point about rules. Twitter cannot presume to know why anyone is posting or sharing the info, so they don't try. They simply prohibit it for any reason. If Musk interprets providing someone's location in real time as doxxing, then it is. If you have fifty billion bucks, or so, laying around, make him an offer and you can change the terms.
That information shared includes name, home address, phone number, schools children go to, etc. It is not doxxing when you simply identify the airport in which a plan landed.
I’m kind of with you on that. It’s a made up word. I personally think it should be two exes. Following the grammar law that a vowel followed by two consonants is a short sound.
Did you read that there are no witnesses to verify this alleged incident? The LA police say that it wasn't reported to them. How do you not call the police in this situation???
And even if it did occur, how does it have anything to do with the publicly available tracking info on Musk's PLANE???
Give it a break MarkS because you're digging yourself into a deeper hole with each and every new reply.
Elon posted a video of the menacing punk and his car on Twitter. His tweet asks anyone who recognizes the person or car to come forward.
The 11 second video clearly shows a very young, light skinned male of about twenty. His face is partly hidden by a black surgical mask, but his dark eyes and eyebrows and his forehead are visible. When he adjusts his mask with his black gloved hands, his strikingly long and narrow nose is briefly exposed. He wears a black Unibomber hooded sweatshirt zipped all the way up.
He sits in a clean and shiny, white, late model Honda car. The car has a license plate holder from the Honda dealership in Loma Linda, California. The California license plate number is CJ82G38 with a renewal in the month of February.
During the past three days, this video has been seen 17.5 million times. It's only a matter of time before this no good, young punk is found, arrested, and brought to justice.
It is wonderful when a conservative tries to act smarter than she is. JACK SWEENEY is potentially a doxxer. He has nothing to do with the journalists who were banned. The man in the mask is a potential stalker or doxxer. HE TOO has nothing whatsoever to do with the banned journalists at all. The banned journalists were banned just because they used the word "@elonjet" while covering the news about that account. UNDERSTAND? Now go back to your hole and reflect.
Umblamb, I don't recall you being very upset when thousands of Americans were suspended for no reason whatsoever. Oh yeah, they were conservatives and until Musk, free speech was only reserved for you guys.
Well in fact it has now come out that the cops were called, in South Pasadena (not LA), and that the incident was due to a stalker of Grimes, and had nothing to do with @elonjet.
It's shocking to me how quickly "free speech" has deteriorated into a nebulous blob that can be shaped and reshaped according to whatever agenda is on the table, and the people who do it must know they're doing it. That is diabolical. The activist journalists who were menacing Musk with real-time coverage of his whereabouts absolutely should have been suspended. But I doubt their time in the corner will lead to meaningful introspection.
None of the reporters were "menacing Musk with real-time coverage of his whereabouts".
They were reporting on the existence of a Twitter account that tracked Musk's plane, which Musk himself had tweeted about, and furthermore said he would not take down.
Did you read the piece we're both commenting on? His child was involved. The journalists weren't reporting on the "existence" of the account tracking Elon's plane. They were reporting on the data -- i.e. where he is and at what time. Wake up.
Are you literate? The “reporters” were linking to the app that tracks Musk’s and others’ real time movements. They rationalize this by claiming it is publicly available information. That’s like saying the entire Encyclopedia Brittanica is publicly available information. It being publicly available and pointing it it out to any and all, including the unhinged and violent, is a difference in kind, not of degree. For goodness sake, read what Abigail just wrote in the very post on which you are commenting. Once you start passing real time personal locations, you’ve gone from exercising free speech to what is commonly called “doxxing” and implicitly threatening the safety of your target.
Are you literate? If you are, you should read up on the full story. "Real-time personal locations" is a lie: there was a twitter account that tracked Musk's PLANE. Musk explicitly said, weeks ago, that he would not take this account down. This exchange was news; reporters covered it. Then, suddenly, Musk declared that any discussion of the plane-tracking account was "doxxing", which is totally absurd, and BANNED (yes, temporarily, at least what he says NOW) the reporters who covered this story as the news that it is.
Oh I get it, tracking Musk’s PLANE is not the same as tracking his “personal location.” Except when he’s in it, maybe? Or a member of his family. There’s a damn lot of difference between following someone digitally when he is traveling and letting the rest of the world know it and suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story just before an election. One is doxxing that serves no serious or legitimate purpose (and carries with it the threat of personal risk in this fraught moment) and the other is a violation of free speech (at least to the extent the FBI or other government agency encouraged it). I don’t blame Musk one bit.
I suppose you enjoyed the story that left wing groups passed out the personal information of disfavored Supreme Court justices and one nut job planned to kill Justice Kavanaugh and his family. After all, where he lives is publicly available information. It’s free speech! I think it was SC Justice Jackson who long ago observed that the First Amendment is not a “suicide pact.” One of Twitter’s old bosses gets a bit of the left’s menacing medicine and the “reporters” freak out. What goes around comes around. And it ain’t any better when one side does it than the other.
Why are right wingers so dense? Do you understand English? The person who tracked Elon Musk's PLANE can be considered to be a doxxer. The BANNED journalists simply used the word @elonjet while reporting on the account being deactivated. That's right. They claimed that the account was DEACTIVATED and used the word @elonjet to identify the account that was deactivated. They were NOT PROMOTING the already deactivated account . They were just reporting on it. The crazy clown czar considered the use of the word @elonjet as a symbol of apparently promoting the account (although in most cases, the account was already deactivated when the word was used!). So this is issue is about JOURNALISTS being banned for no reason. Not the @elonjet account which could arguably be doxxing. UNDERSTAND?!?! More than one can play this game. If you think a conservative can outsmart a liberal, TRY ME!
There are levels of denseness, I suppose, then there is outright stupidity. Only a very stupid person can reason that the banned journalists have no responsibility for publicizing an app or website that can easily be located and used for the purpose of following the travels of someone they dislike when that’s exactly what they did. Because the ever eager “journalists” who claim they weren’t doxxing anyone didn’t publish the very information in their posts doesn’t relieve them of responsibility for pointing someone else directly to it. It’s at least doxxing, once removed. And only a sophist would try to be so clever.
If I decide I want some stranger I dislike to be harassed and possibly put in physical danger, I don’t have to print his personal information on the internet. I can achieve the same result by notifying everyone I can that while I may not give you the information directly you will conveniently find it right HERE. Hey, again, it’s free speech and my hands are clean.
Nor do I blame Elon Musk for reconsidering his policy; if that be hypocrisy, please try harder. (I believe there was an incident involving his son that may have affected his decision; there are few things that concentrate the mind more than that). Publishing his whereabouts (or anyone else’s, for that matter) serves no broader or important purpose whether it’s public information or not. And suppressing it on Twitter in no way seriously infringes on anyone’s free speech. What intellectual or curiosity itch is scratched by knowing that Elon Musk is planning to fly from San Francisco to Austin at 2 p.m. tomorrow other than to allow some possibly deranged person to be made aware of it? If that isn’t doxxing, we need a new word.
Gene is correct, I will assume the ‘critics’ , usually defined as those that have no skin in the game but only an opinion, would sing a very different tune if their locations, addresses , family information were publicly desiminated over public platforms, the hypocrisy of the critics destroys any legitimacy of their comments ….
The car incident, if it happend at all (there are no witnesses and no police report was filed), had NOTHING to do with plane tracking or any of the reporters who were, you know, REPORTING on the plane controversy.
Because they want conflict and outrage. They are not particularly skilled or intelligent or insightful. Knee jerk outrage is their bread and butter. And I really think Elon wants to help establish a detente in the culture war, which would be the death knell for most MSM "journalists" today, though some, like Don Lemon, have changed gears and are really trying to show they still have the chops to do the work.
This is an unsettling time with how we deal with free speech. We're definitely testing limits that haven't been tested before.
I'm not sure I completely agree with Abigail that this policy is 100% appropriate, especially since things like flight records are publicly available and there is case law that protects the publication of them. I do agree there needs to be some guardrails in place to protect minors like Musk's son and deter violence, but I don't know where the right place to draw that line is. It's a bit blurry right now.
yeah you accessing that public information for yourself is different than intentionally blasting that info to 1000s of followers. followers who particularly dont like elon musk. I could probably find public information about you. now how would you like it if i posted it to 100k followers? that elonjet person has a political agenda, why not blast Bidens private location or any of the other leftist who fly jets, yet he's specifically targeted Trump and Elon.
Legally, I’m not sure that would up. There does have to be some malicious intent or criminal negligence there. It might fall into the latter, but again, the courts have ruled in the favor of people publishing that information.
why target particular people tho like Elon and Trump? there's an obvious ill intent on elonjets part. I still dont see how stalking is a matter of free speech. Since twitter is a private company and If i were Elon I'd specifically make sure my Family and myself isn't put in danger and would completely make a rule to ban said accounts. Call me a flip flop on my free speech, so be it. at least my family will be safe.
Well, again, you have to prove that, and there’s a high standard of evidence to prove malicious intent. Especially after last night’s Twitter files, I think Twitter has shown itself to be a government actor, and even as “a private company” (although I really don’t buy that big) they would need to be subject to regulation.
I’m sure the papa bear came out in him, but he also has so many more privileges and advantages that people in other situations don’t. For example, hiring private security, purchasing a jet under a shell company name if he wants to go incognito, etc.
If something similar happened to my hypothetical child, yes, I’d want to go scorched earth on the person. Nevertheless, as a private citizen, I have absolutely no right to be a bully and make that person pay — especially when what they did was, in fact, completely legal.
Thank you, Abigail, for this common sense perspective on tracking in real time. I think it is crazy to promote such a policy especially at a time when our population seems to have lost the ability to see the humanity of those we don’t agree with.
I’m eager to give Elon Musk a chance to make Twitter a true public square. After experiencing the capture and decline of all of our public institutions, mine is not a blind trust. I am hopeful, though, because Elon has an amazing mind which may lead us to an exciting future that the average American can enjoy. As a woman, I am very aware of how tracking can lead to stalking, which can, and often does, lead to violence. I agree that tracking in real time is more information than the public needs to know.
lol @elonmusksjet. I hope these alleged crazy stalkers, who can allegedly pinpoint a random car in a city of four million people based on totally unaffiliated airplane transponder data, don't think to check Instagram. If they do, I guess we can only hope the real journalists have successfully purged the public discourse of everyone who can't appreciate the distinction between this sort of democracidal doxxing and the capricious political censorship which it somewhat resembles before they do. For whatever it's worth, count me as someone who does think our democracy "could handle" the existence of radio transponders, as it has happily done for decades.
This is the best take yet that I have seen on this topic. Musk’s banning of those journalists was a disappointment to me when it first happened, and I have followed the story and various responses to it. As the story has unfolded, I can absolutely understand his concerns about personal safety and the safety of his family. And every critic of Musk’s actions here, deep in their true hearts, would feel the same way were they to find themselves under the same circumstances. Hopefully Musk will be able to craft a better (and more consistent and evenly applied) response to so-called “doxxing” and reinstate these banned journalists - - but those journalists need to behave responsibly, like true journalists, not extremist activist SJW’s who would love nothing more than to see some unhinged fellow traveler make an attempt on Musk’s life or the life of a family member. Making threats against someone’s life is not protected speech, whether privately or in a public square. And I agree with Shirer here that there is no legitimate reason for publicizing public figures’ exact locations other than to facilitate the harassment of those public figures. It is a fuzzy line, no doubt, but public figures’ lives are more important than any bizarre interest some people may have about those public figures’ real-time location. A line must be drawn, and it think is reasonable to draw it here. Now that line must be applied consistently and equally, regardless of the viewpoints of the actors...
I just cannot equate free speech to identifying a person’s location. As a private citizen, I wouldn’t want it, so why does anyone think it’s ok for someone else, particularly someone who has such a big target on his back?
100%. I also don’t get the “snap maps” wherein Snapchat users can share their location.
But they can also opt out of that feature, and many do. I would feel extremely vulnerable and unsafe if I were a public figure whose exact location were broadcast.
What other reason would someone have for revealing a person’s location besides their being harassed or harmed?
Abigail I'm glad you've mentioned some analysis of the gender critical campaigners suppressed by twitter. Despite saying that Musk is listening and despite musk saying there would be an amnesty for the cancelled, most prominent GC suspended accounts have not been restored, including Kellie Jay Keen, Graham Linehan, Fred Sargent and Holly Lawford. I hope you can be part of a fuller twitterfiles on the GC scandal that goes alongside those accounts being restored.
Right or wrong, I experience glee when the corporate “journalists” get some of their own crap dumped on them. I also don’t use the little bird app and I don’t worship billionaires. That is very much Late Roman Republic stuff, and dangerous.
It’s hard to keep track of Musk’s children, wives, and marital status. However, I will simply point out that there’s no more sure-fired way to lose custody of one’s child than to have a family court judge or some caseworker opine that their environment is unsafe. So, without pointing it out, which would make it even worse than it is, Musk has gone about doing what he absolutely needs to do in order to protect his children. This has nothing at all to do with First Amendment rights, as you so clearly point out.
"Because when the crazies come for your children, you experience something captured by the phrase “she saw red.” And you aren’t a rational thinker any longer, nor really a person. You’re just a mammal, red in tooth and claw. And you will do anything—anything—to protect your young."
This is pretty much how I feel about the promotion of Radical Gender theory in the schools, "affirmation", the mutilation of children, and the Biden Administration's role. Hurrah for Gays Against Groomers!
Absolutely true about the anathema that is all things "transgender.
And I bet Elon agrees with you, too. A few months ago, his 18 year old son actually came out as a male to female "transgender." Father and son are apparently bitterly estranged, and the son petitioned to have his last name changed from Musk.
To make matters even worse, earlier this year, the mother of Elon's two year old, the tattooed and elf eared pop singer Grimes, had a brief affair with "Chelsea" Manning, also a male to female "transgender."
Gee. I knew about the 18 year old son but not the rest. I am trying hard to take back reality based language. So, when these young people rebel against parents or simply become indoctrinated into the Gender Cult I like to reject the "coming out" language which is borrowed from "coming out as gay". We need to stop allowing these to be lumped together. Gays Against Groomers would agree, I think. I also reject that there is a magic flower that is a "transgender person". The kid thinks he wants to be a transexual and there are too many in medicine and pharma eager to make a buck off of him before he matures beyond the issues he is having right now.
You probably heard about this guy:
"Ex-Navy SEAL who detransitioned warns transgender teens: ‘You need to slow down’"
Yes. You're absolutely right. Reality based language is so important. Of course, there's no such thing as "transgender" or "gender." The older term "transsexual" is better because it at least acknowledges sex. But even it isn't perfect since no one can change their sex either. Anyway, I will no longer use the phrase "came out." It belongs to the gay movement which has absolutely nothing to do with the crazy and dangerous"transgender" cult.
I did watch part of the interview with the former Navy Seal the other night. The more brave men and women who speak out publicly about their own detransitions, the better. These people have a powerful voice.
Yes. I do remember Corporal Klinger. In fact, I wrote a little paragraph about him the day before yesterday. Here it goes:
Consider this. Just a couple of decades ago, ridiculously unconvincing female impersonators like Dr. "Rachel" Levine, America's “first-ever female four-star admiral of the U.S. Public Health Services" , and Colonel "Jennifer" Prizker, the world's first openly "transgender" billionaire, would have been cast as an object of ridicule, the butt of jokes on TV or in film. Picture Corporal Klinger in Mash; Jack Lemon and Tony Curtis in Some Like it Hot; or the fabulous, excrement eating Divine in John Waters' classic Pink Flamingos.
But today, mentally ill men in dresses such as Sam Brinton, the former luggage pilfering head of the US nuclear waste disposal program and B Level actors like the tampon wielding Dylan Mulvaney are not limited to the big screen or the small screen. No. They now freely prance around in see through lace cocktail dresses while they dance the Macarena up and down the hallowed halls of the White House Oval Office.
Yup - that about sums it up. The only things I would add are that Sam helped the Biden Administration craft their "keep secrets at school from parents" policy and Pritzker pours a ton of money into "trans" causes.
It sounds like he was supposed to be a poster child for this phony "civil rights movement of our time".
Good job United Airlines! Scott was 25 when he committed suicide. Maybe he needed real help rather than "affirmation" and "confirmation" medicine. If we had a National Millstone Act like TX is trying to pass he could have worn a dress and maybe used his real name but not been operated on before age 26.
MN Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan on parenting and children changing their gender...
"When our children tell us who they are, it is our job as grown-ups to listen and to believe them.
That's what it means to be a good parent."
@elonmusk Replying to @covid_clarity
Not when they’re fed propaganda by adults.
Moreover, every child goes through an identity crisis before their personality/identity crystallizes.
Therefore, we shouldn’t allow severe, irreversible surgery or sterilizing drugs that they may regret until at least age 18.
@covid_clarity Mar 15
MN Governor @GovTimWalz signs a "gender-affirming" executive order to support transgender procedures. Mar 16
In Minnesota, we don’t allow bullies to keep us from doing the right thing. As long as @GovTimWalz and I are in office, we will continue fighting to ensure our trans neighbors are safe.
This was my perspective too and I've seen little of it in the reacts. Did he overreach? Maybe. Did he just have his kid stalked, and told people not to doxx him, and they did it anyway? Yes. I don't think there is any scenario more forgiving of a bit of overreach than that.
Doxxing has never been part of free speech so of course it is not contradictory for Musk to ban the ones who doxxed. Before you read this and think to yourself that it wasn't doxxing because it was public record, dig deeper. It was not public records alone that led to the man on the hood of the car. Elon had a PIA and was flying in a private jet not a public one. Sweeny knew both of these things, bragged about it, and continued. This is illegal and doxxing by definition. Also please ask yourself, even if it wasn't illegal, is it right? Should this posting people's public flight records online be legal? Should people's personal info (besides criminal record) be online at all? Why do we call it personal if it is not personal? I ask you to forget your career, political affiliation, and opinion of Musk for a moment and just answer as a fellow human. Is it right?
Musk made a fair and rational decision which you and all other rational people affirm, yet multiple times you explicitly doubt his future intentions and commitment to free speech. You are genuine and fair in your writing, so can you please explain which actions caused you to be so pessimistic about Elon’s commitment to free speech? Based on what he has done so far at great personal cost, should he not get the benefit of the doubt until he actually makes decisions contrary to his commitment? Your pessimism seems unwarranted and unfair.
Just want to point out something that I think is VERY important.
From the article;
“The Twitter Files remain a vital revelation—evidence of a systemic attempt by Twitter executives to shape public debate and even political outcomes.”
While it is true that there was a systemic attempt by Twitter executives to ‘shape public debate and even political outcomes’ there is something not mentioned that is a hell of a lot more important.......
IT WAS ALSO A SYSTEMIC ATTEMPT BY THE FBI TO SHAPE PUBLIC DEBATE AND POLITICAL OUTCOMES......
In other words, the FBI was giving in-kind contributions to the Democratic Party by censoring and disrupting their opponents.
Posting real time coordinates of people's whereabouts is an entirely different kind of 'unsafe' than someone posting an opinion or belief we don't like.
Agreed. And note that AOC was one of the first to cry about how scary J6 was for her when she was never really in harm’s way. I would also note that LibsofTikTok was kicked off but efforts to doxx the owner of the account were never taken down. Doxxing isn’t free speech - it’s just revenge, hate, and incitement of fear and violence.
Not a SINGLE one of those suspended journalists posted even a coordinate of Musk's location. They simply used the word "@elonjet" while covering the account's deactivation. Felon Musk took that to mean that they were "leading" people to that account.
Are you really that stupid? Put yourself in his shoes. The link is enough as proof of doxxing unless you are living in lala land. Doxxing should get you suspended - grow up and live with it.
So I guess Musk was living in la-la land on Nov.6 when he tweeted that he would NOT take down the plane-tracking account.
And Musk suddenly going bonkers over this has (very predictably!) resulted in the Streisand effect: there is now a 100,000-memeber reddit subgroup dedicated to tracking his plane: https://www.reddit.com/r/ElonJetTracker/
Such a genius!
Your animus towards Musk is duly noted. You may find Commieprof charming.
I find Dave Chappelle charming:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzkreBMHUFY
That is false. They openly and notoriously tried to get people to go to either the elonjet account or the guy's web page - so as to boost the number of people that would be knowledgeable about where to find the real time information as to where Musk was.
What they did was totally evil.
And what happened to them? They were all had their accounts restored in a few HOURS. Not the 19 months that it took to restore Libs of TikTok, or other innocents who did nothing at all wrong.
The herd of "journalists" who tried to steer people to a site which could result in Musks' assassination was appalling. They should have been banned forever.
This is a lie, using very careful language to IMPLY that the journalists did not provide Musk's real time location, by specifying coordinates as the means. Therefore Umblamb, you are a bad faith actor.
I directly linked from the very first Harwell article I looked up, to Elon Musk's private jet real time route. Harwell intended that link.
When you have to deceive to persuade people, Umblamb, this is a powerful indicator that your values will not withstand open scrutiny.
Felon?
@elonjet didn't post real-time coordinates.
None of the banned journalists posted any coordinates. They just wrote about the ban of @elonjet.
Thanks Abigail for covering this development so articulately. Musk is correct to draw a line in the sand when it comes to safety concerns around his family. Suck it up, all you folks who've been given time outs!
Except that none of the reporters actually threatened his or his family's safety in any way.
So Mr. "S", would be ok with Musk revealing your real name and location? Because clearly, your "name" argues otherwise.
He can track my plane all he wants.
So cute. What about your car?
Today, so called "progressive policies" do anything but "promote social welfare". We must not destroy the rights of parents to protect their children. This is fundamental. And, everyone who disagrees with you is not 'against Democracy", sir. :-)
MarkS's Substack profile claims he's a "liberal" and supports "individual rights." In this case that means he supports the right of an individual who doesn't like a particular person to provide information to some unknown third party that would allow that third party to stalk and murder the disliked person and all their family members. Got it.
Listen Nancy. CAN YOU READ? Did you READ what MarkS wrote? Do you understand English? None of the reporters even provided ONE coordinate of Musk, his son, or anyone else. They simply used the word "@elonjet" while covering the news!
If by location you mean something as general as “La Guardia Airport”…yeah, I’m fine with it.
Doxxing was prohibited pre-Musk. There was no qualifier for “actual” threats. See how rules work?
And yet, Musk said weeks ago that he would not take down the plane-tracking account. If it was "prohibited" then, why not?
Probably that was before his child was threatened.
One of the many thousands of journalists who have not been suspended can ask him.
They did ask him. And he fleed in four minutes. Besides, not ONE of the banned journalists even remotely did anything qualifying as doxxing. They just had the word @Elonjet in their tweets. Almost all of them were commenting on the account being banned. And our genius czar took their MENTION of the banned account as doxxing.
Dry your eyes. They've all been reinstated.
Their accounts were to be suspended for 7 days, not banned. I heard that space- he was clear, and it was clear the journalists were in too big a tizzy to see reason.
You missed the point of doxxing. Doxxing is sharing someone else's information with strangers. The one sharing does not know for what purpose the information will be used, nor by whom.
Seems that you're missing the point. The intentions of the doxxor are irrelevant, which was my original point about rules. Twitter cannot presume to know why anyone is posting or sharing the info, so they don't try. They simply prohibit it for any reason. If Musk interprets providing someone's location in real time as doxxing, then it is. If you have fifty billion bucks, or so, laying around, make him an offer and you can change the terms.
The point of doxxing is to intimidate and cause the person doxxed to fear for the safety of themselves and their loved ones. IMO indefensible
That information shared includes name, home address, phone number, schools children go to, etc. It is not doxxing when you simply identify the airport in which a plan landed.
Just a sidebar. The correct spelling is Doxing. I've been corrected by my Grammarly app.
Thanks. That's what I had, then I changed it. I keep seeing it spelled xx. Like "vaxxed," it's not really a word, so I guess either is acceptable.
I’m kind of with you on that. It’s a made up word. I personally think it should be two exes. Following the grammar law that a vowel followed by two consonants is a short sound.
What is the point of doxxing MarkS if not to threaten harm? It’s not a PSA.
Except NO ONE except Jack Sweeney doxxed Musk. The journalists just used the word "@elonjet" while covering the news.
Did you read the part where a car trailed the car carrying his child, and someone jumped on the hood??
Did you read that there are no witnesses to verify this alleged incident? The LA police say that it wasn't reported to them. How do you not call the police in this situation???
And even if it did occur, how does it have anything to do with the publicly available tracking info on Musk's PLANE???
Give it a break MarkS because you're digging yourself into a deeper hole with each and every new reply.
Elon posted a video of the menacing punk and his car on Twitter. His tweet asks anyone who recognizes the person or car to come forward.
The 11 second video clearly shows a very young, light skinned male of about twenty. His face is partly hidden by a black surgical mask, but his dark eyes and eyebrows and his forehead are visible. When he adjusts his mask with his black gloved hands, his strikingly long and narrow nose is briefly exposed. He wears a black Unibomber hooded sweatshirt zipped all the way up.
He sits in a clean and shiny, white, late model Honda car. The car has a license plate holder from the Honda dealership in Loma Linda, California. The California license plate number is CJ82G38 with a renewal in the month of February.
During the past three days, this video has been seen 17.5 million times. It's only a matter of time before this no good, young punk is found, arrested, and brought to justice.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603190155107794944
It is wonderful when a conservative tries to act smarter than she is. JACK SWEENEY is potentially a doxxer. He has nothing to do with the journalists who were banned. The man in the mask is a potential stalker or doxxer. HE TOO has nothing whatsoever to do with the banned journalists at all. The banned journalists were banned just because they used the word "@elonjet" while covering the news about that account. UNDERSTAND? Now go back to your hole and reflect.
Umblamb, I don't recall you being very upset when thousands of Americans were suspended for no reason whatsoever. Oh yeah, they were conservatives and until Musk, free speech was only reserved for you guys.
Well in fact it has now come out that the cops were called, in South Pasadena (not LA), and that the incident was due to a stalker of Grimes, and had nothing to do with @elonjet.
False.
You were there?
It's shocking to me how quickly "free speech" has deteriorated into a nebulous blob that can be shaped and reshaped according to whatever agenda is on the table, and the people who do it must know they're doing it. That is diabolical. The activist journalists who were menacing Musk with real-time coverage of his whereabouts absolutely should have been suspended. But I doubt their time in the corner will lead to meaningful introspection.
No one needs their location known to the world 24/7...
None of the reporters were "menacing Musk with real-time coverage of his whereabouts".
They were reporting on the existence of a Twitter account that tracked Musk's plane, which Musk himself had tweeted about, and furthermore said he would not take down.
Did you read the piece we're both commenting on? His child was involved. The journalists weren't reporting on the "existence" of the account tracking Elon's plane. They were reporting on the data -- i.e. where he is and at what time. Wake up.
The banned reporters DID NOT report on data: "None of the banned journalists appeared to have shared Musk’s precise real-time location." https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/15/media/twitter-musk-journalists-hnk-intl/index.html
If you claim this is wrong, provide evidence.
Re Musk's kid: There was no police report, and so far, no independent witnesses.
Also, even if it did happen, no evidence at all that the kid's location came from any of the accounts Musk suspended in response.
Stop drinking Musk's Kool Aid. Don't believe everything he says.
Why should we drink yours?
Because everything I say is verifiable fact.
But clearly people here don't care about that.
I live in LA - you forget our PD was abandoned in 2020.
https://twitter.com/jtLOL/status/1603574811162189826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1603574811162189826%7Ctwgr%5Ea6e2252d3a3ec52bfb6e26677a1b130c51cfa4b9%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fnick-arama%2F2022%2F12%2F16%2Fwatch-keith-olbermann-is-so-upset-with-elon-suspending-him-hes-gone-to-the-dogs-n674677
If that's a reply to me, I don't click on twitter links.
Also, do you not know that everything after the question mark in the first line is just there to track you?
You're just exposing your own search history here by blindly copying that full link.
Are you literate? The “reporters” were linking to the app that tracks Musk’s and others’ real time movements. They rationalize this by claiming it is publicly available information. That’s like saying the entire Encyclopedia Brittanica is publicly available information. It being publicly available and pointing it it out to any and all, including the unhinged and violent, is a difference in kind, not of degree. For goodness sake, read what Abigail just wrote in the very post on which you are commenting. Once you start passing real time personal locations, you’ve gone from exercising free speech to what is commonly called “doxxing” and implicitly threatening the safety of your target.
Are you literate? If you are, you should read up on the full story. "Real-time personal locations" is a lie: there was a twitter account that tracked Musk's PLANE. Musk explicitly said, weeks ago, that he would not take this account down. This exchange was news; reporters covered it. Then, suddenly, Musk declared that any discussion of the plane-tracking account was "doxxing", which is totally absurd, and BANNED (yes, temporarily, at least what he says NOW) the reporters who covered this story as the news that it is.
Oh I get it, tracking Musk’s PLANE is not the same as tracking his “personal location.” Except when he’s in it, maybe? Or a member of his family. There’s a damn lot of difference between following someone digitally when he is traveling and letting the rest of the world know it and suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story just before an election. One is doxxing that serves no serious or legitimate purpose (and carries with it the threat of personal risk in this fraught moment) and the other is a violation of free speech (at least to the extent the FBI or other government agency encouraged it). I don’t blame Musk one bit.
I suppose you enjoyed the story that left wing groups passed out the personal information of disfavored Supreme Court justices and one nut job planned to kill Justice Kavanaugh and his family. After all, where he lives is publicly available information. It’s free speech! I think it was SC Justice Jackson who long ago observed that the First Amendment is not a “suicide pact.” One of Twitter’s old bosses gets a bit of the left’s menacing medicine and the “reporters” freak out. What goes around comes around. And it ain’t any better when one side does it than the other.
Why are right wingers so dense? Do you understand English? The person who tracked Elon Musk's PLANE can be considered to be a doxxer. The BANNED journalists simply used the word @elonjet while reporting on the account being deactivated. That's right. They claimed that the account was DEACTIVATED and used the word @elonjet to identify the account that was deactivated. They were NOT PROMOTING the already deactivated account . They were just reporting on it. The crazy clown czar considered the use of the word @elonjet as a symbol of apparently promoting the account (although in most cases, the account was already deactivated when the word was used!). So this is issue is about JOURNALISTS being banned for no reason. Not the @elonjet account which could arguably be doxxing. UNDERSTAND?!?! More than one can play this game. If you think a conservative can outsmart a liberal, TRY ME!
There are levels of denseness, I suppose, then there is outright stupidity. Only a very stupid person can reason that the banned journalists have no responsibility for publicizing an app or website that can easily be located and used for the purpose of following the travels of someone they dislike when that’s exactly what they did. Because the ever eager “journalists” who claim they weren’t doxxing anyone didn’t publish the very information in their posts doesn’t relieve them of responsibility for pointing someone else directly to it. It’s at least doxxing, once removed. And only a sophist would try to be so clever.
If I decide I want some stranger I dislike to be harassed and possibly put in physical danger, I don’t have to print his personal information on the internet. I can achieve the same result by notifying everyone I can that while I may not give you the information directly you will conveniently find it right HERE. Hey, again, it’s free speech and my hands are clean.
Nor do I blame Elon Musk for reconsidering his policy; if that be hypocrisy, please try harder. (I believe there was an incident involving his son that may have affected his decision; there are few things that concentrate the mind more than that). Publishing his whereabouts (or anyone else’s, for that matter) serves no broader or important purpose whether it’s public information or not. And suppressing it on Twitter in no way seriously infringes on anyone’s free speech. What intellectual or curiosity itch is scratched by knowing that Elon Musk is planning to fly from San Francisco to Austin at 2 p.m. tomorrow other than to allow some possibly deranged person to be made aware of it? If that isn’t doxxing, we need a new word.
He may have banned them suddenly; it doesn't appear that he did so arbitrarily as you imply.
Gene is correct, I will assume the ‘critics’ , usually defined as those that have no skin in the game but only an opinion, would sing a very different tune if their locations, addresses , family information were publicly desiminated over public platforms, the hypocrisy of the critics destroys any legitimacy of their comments ….
Of course none of that actually happened to Musk on any of the reporters accounts that he banned.
All those reporters did was mention @ElonJet, which tracked his plane, and which he had explicitly said on Nov.6 he would allow to continue:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456
The car incident, if it happend at all (there are no witnesses and no police report was filed), had NOTHING to do with plane tracking or any of the reporters who were, you know, REPORTING on the plane controversy.
Again MarkS, why? So everyone can admire his planes and cars? Or so they can jump on the hood and threaten his kids?
Once again, there was NO THREAT to Musk from THE REPORTERS that he banned; ALL THEY DID was discuss the controversy, as we are doing here.
Because they want conflict and outrage. They are not particularly skilled or intelligent or insightful. Knee jerk outrage is their bread and butter. And I really think Elon wants to help establish a detente in the culture war, which would be the death knell for most MSM "journalists" today, though some, like Don Lemon, have changed gears and are really trying to show they still have the chops to do the work.
This is an unsettling time with how we deal with free speech. We're definitely testing limits that haven't been tested before.
I'm not sure I completely agree with Abigail that this policy is 100% appropriate, especially since things like flight records are publicly available and there is case law that protects the publication of them. I do agree there needs to be some guardrails in place to protect minors like Musk's son and deter violence, but I don't know where the right place to draw that line is. It's a bit blurry right now.
yeah you accessing that public information for yourself is different than intentionally blasting that info to 1000s of followers. followers who particularly dont like elon musk. I could probably find public information about you. now how would you like it if i posted it to 100k followers? that elonjet person has a political agenda, why not blast Bidens private location or any of the other leftist who fly jets, yet he's specifically targeted Trump and Elon.
Legally, I’m not sure that would up. There does have to be some malicious intent or criminal negligence there. It might fall into the latter, but again, the courts have ruled in the favor of people publishing that information.
why target particular people tho like Elon and Trump? there's an obvious ill intent on elonjets part. I still dont see how stalking is a matter of free speech. Since twitter is a private company and If i were Elon I'd specifically make sure my Family and myself isn't put in danger and would completely make a rule to ban said accounts. Call me a flip flop on my free speech, so be it. at least my family will be safe.
Well, again, you have to prove that, and there’s a high standard of evidence to prove malicious intent. Especially after last night’s Twitter files, I think Twitter has shown itself to be a government actor, and even as “a private company” (although I really don’t buy that big) they would need to be subject to regulation.
I’m sure the papa bear came out in him, but he also has so many more privileges and advantages that people in other situations don’t. For example, hiring private security, purchasing a jet under a shell company name if he wants to go incognito, etc.
If something similar happened to my hypothetical child, yes, I’d want to go scorched earth on the person. Nevertheless, as a private citizen, I have absolutely no right to be a bully and make that person pay — especially when what they did was, in fact, completely legal.
And one could safely assume that none of them had the slightest problem with pre-Musk twitter banning the NY Post or any one of several journalists.
Criticism of Musk on this is total bullshit. Posting where famous people are is NOT free speech. It IS incitement.
None of the reporters who were banned posted Musk's real-time location.
Thank you, Abigail, for this common sense perspective on tracking in real time. I think it is crazy to promote such a policy especially at a time when our population seems to have lost the ability to see the humanity of those we don’t agree with.
I’m eager to give Elon Musk a chance to make Twitter a true public square. After experiencing the capture and decline of all of our public institutions, mine is not a blind trust. I am hopeful, though, because Elon has an amazing mind which may lead us to an exciting future that the average American can enjoy. As a woman, I am very aware of how tracking can lead to stalking, which can, and often does, lead to violence. I agree that tracking in real time is more information than the public needs to know.
The location of Elon’s jet may be available through the FAA. So let a stalker do the work to get that. Journalists should not do the work for them.
Maybe Elon shouldn't tweet about an account that tracks his plane (which he did) and announce that he won't take it down (which he also did).
lol @elonmusksjet. I hope these alleged crazy stalkers, who can allegedly pinpoint a random car in a city of four million people based on totally unaffiliated airplane transponder data, don't think to check Instagram. If they do, I guess we can only hope the real journalists have successfully purged the public discourse of everyone who can't appreciate the distinction between this sort of democracidal doxxing and the capricious political censorship which it somewhat resembles before they do. For whatever it's worth, count me as someone who does think our democracy "could handle" the existence of radio transponders, as it has happily done for decades.
This is the best take yet that I have seen on this topic. Musk’s banning of those journalists was a disappointment to me when it first happened, and I have followed the story and various responses to it. As the story has unfolded, I can absolutely understand his concerns about personal safety and the safety of his family. And every critic of Musk’s actions here, deep in their true hearts, would feel the same way were they to find themselves under the same circumstances. Hopefully Musk will be able to craft a better (and more consistent and evenly applied) response to so-called “doxxing” and reinstate these banned journalists - - but those journalists need to behave responsibly, like true journalists, not extremist activist SJW’s who would love nothing more than to see some unhinged fellow traveler make an attempt on Musk’s life or the life of a family member. Making threats against someone’s life is not protected speech, whether privately or in a public square. And I agree with Shirer here that there is no legitimate reason for publicizing public figures’ exact locations other than to facilitate the harassment of those public figures. It is a fuzzy line, no doubt, but public figures’ lives are more important than any bizarre interest some people may have about those public figures’ real-time location. A line must be drawn, and it think is reasonable to draw it here. Now that line must be applied consistently and equally, regardless of the viewpoints of the actors...
I just cannot equate free speech to identifying a person’s location. As a private citizen, I wouldn’t want it, so why does anyone think it’s ok for someone else, particularly someone who has such a big target on his back?
I just don’t get it.
None of the reporters who were banned gave any real-tine info on Musk's location.
Ad nauseum posting of the same claim does not enhance your credibility.
It simply makes you tedious, Mr. S.
The truth benefits from repetition.
Actually, lie starts looking like truth after many repetitions. That’s exactly how propaganda works.
Like "trans women" are women? haha
Your "truth" does not.
100%. I also don’t get the “snap maps” wherein Snapchat users can share their location.
But they can also opt out of that feature, and many do. I would feel extremely vulnerable and unsafe if I were a public figure whose exact location were broadcast.
What other reason would someone have for revealing a person’s location besides their being harassed or harmed?
How specific does the location have to be for it to be doxxing? Saying X person is at LAX airport is not very specific.
Abigail I'm glad you've mentioned some analysis of the gender critical campaigners suppressed by twitter. Despite saying that Musk is listening and despite musk saying there would be an amnesty for the cancelled, most prominent GC suspended accounts have not been restored, including Kellie Jay Keen, Graham Linehan, Fred Sargent and Holly Lawford. I hope you can be part of a fuller twitterfiles on the GC scandal that goes alongside those accounts being restored.
Right or wrong, I experience glee when the corporate “journalists” get some of their own crap dumped on them. I also don’t use the little bird app and I don’t worship billionaires. That is very much Late Roman Republic stuff, and dangerous.
"Don't use the bird app" is good advice (and was before Musk), which very few will take, alas.
Abigail, good piece!
It’s hard to keep track of Musk’s children, wives, and marital status. However, I will simply point out that there’s no more sure-fired way to lose custody of one’s child than to have a family court judge or some caseworker opine that their environment is unsafe. So, without pointing it out, which would make it even worse than it is, Musk has gone about doing what he absolutely needs to do in order to protect his children. This has nothing at all to do with First Amendment rights, as you so clearly point out.
"Because when the crazies come for your children, you experience something captured by the phrase “she saw red.” And you aren’t a rational thinker any longer, nor really a person. You’re just a mammal, red in tooth and claw. And you will do anything—anything—to protect your young."
This is pretty much how I feel about the promotion of Radical Gender theory in the schools, "affirmation", the mutilation of children, and the Biden Administration's role. Hurrah for Gays Against Groomers!
Absolutely true about the anathema that is all things "transgender.
And I bet Elon agrees with you, too. A few months ago, his 18 year old son actually came out as a male to female "transgender." Father and son are apparently bitterly estranged, and the son petitioned to have his last name changed from Musk.
https://nypost.com/2022/06/21/who-is-xavier-musk-elon-musks-transgender-child-who-wants-to-change-name/
To make matters even worse, earlier this year, the mother of Elon's two year old, the tattooed and elf eared pop singer Grimes, had a brief affair with "Chelsea" Manning, also a male to female "transgender."
https://pagesix.com/2022/03/11/grimes-dating-leaker-chelsea-manning-after-elon-musk-breakup/
Gee. I knew about the 18 year old son but not the rest. I am trying hard to take back reality based language. So, when these young people rebel against parents or simply become indoctrinated into the Gender Cult I like to reject the "coming out" language which is borrowed from "coming out as gay". We need to stop allowing these to be lumped together. Gays Against Groomers would agree, I think. I also reject that there is a magic flower that is a "transgender person". The kid thinks he wants to be a transexual and there are too many in medicine and pharma eager to make a buck off of him before he matures beyond the issues he is having right now.
You probably heard about this guy:
"Ex-Navy SEAL who detransitioned warns transgender teens: ‘You need to slow down’"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ex-navy-seal-who-detransitioned-warns-transgender-teens-you-need-to-slow-down/ar-AA15cr3O
Yes. You're absolutely right. Reality based language is so important. Of course, there's no such thing as "transgender" or "gender." The older term "transsexual" is better because it at least acknowledges sex. But even it isn't perfect since no one can change their sex either. Anyway, I will no longer use the phrase "came out." It belongs to the gay movement which has absolutely nothing to do with the crazy and dangerous"transgender" cult.
I did watch part of the interview with the former Navy Seal the other night. The more brave men and women who speak out publicly about their own detransitions, the better. These people have a powerful voice.
:-)
I think the evil narcissist crazies have been in the lead because they understand the power of language a la "1984".
Remember Corporal Klinger on MASH (g)?
Yes. I do remember Corporal Klinger. In fact, I wrote a little paragraph about him the day before yesterday. Here it goes:
Consider this. Just a couple of decades ago, ridiculously unconvincing female impersonators like Dr. "Rachel" Levine, America's “first-ever female four-star admiral of the U.S. Public Health Services" , and Colonel "Jennifer" Prizker, the world's first openly "transgender" billionaire, would have been cast as an object of ridicule, the butt of jokes on TV or in film. Picture Corporal Klinger in Mash; Jack Lemon and Tony Curtis in Some Like it Hot; or the fabulous, excrement eating Divine in John Waters' classic Pink Flamingos.
But today, mentally ill men in dresses such as Sam Brinton, the former luggage pilfering head of the US nuclear waste disposal program and B Level actors like the tampon wielding Dylan Mulvaney are not limited to the big screen or the small screen. No. They now freely prance around in see through lace cocktail dresses while they dance the Macarena up and down the hallowed halls of the White House Oval Office.
Yup - that about sums it up. The only things I would add are that Sam helped the Biden Administration craft their "keep secrets at school from parents" policy and Pritzker pours a ton of money into "trans" causes.
Lets bring back the laugh track!
Also, did you hear about this poor young man?
"Trans flight attendant famed for airline ad dies by suicide: ‘Sorry I could not be stronger’"
https://nypost.com/2023/03/23/trans-flight-attendant-famed-for-united-ad-dies-by-suicied/?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPTwitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow
It sounds like he was supposed to be a poster child for this phony "civil rights movement of our time".
Good job United Airlines! Scott was 25 when he committed suicide. Maybe he needed real help rather than "affirmation" and "confirmation" medicine. If we had a National Millstone Act like TX is trying to pass he could have worn a dress and maybe used his real name but not been operated on before age 26.
Tim Walz of MN is full steam ahead on the child mutilation. "Safe" now means causing irrevocable harm to children?
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1636463718455189511
@covid_clarity Mar 9
MN Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan on parenting and children changing their gender...
"When our children tell us who they are, it is our job as grown-ups to listen and to believe them.
That's what it means to be a good parent."
@elonmusk Replying to @covid_clarity
Not when they’re fed propaganda by adults.
Moreover, every child goes through an identity crisis before their personality/identity crystallizes.
Therefore, we shouldn’t allow severe, irreversible surgery or sterilizing drugs that they may regret until at least age 18.
@covid_clarity Mar 15
MN Governor @GovTimWalz signs a "gender-affirming" executive order to support transgender procedures. Mar 16
In Minnesota, we don’t allow bullies to keep us from doing the right thing. As long as @GovTimWalz and I are in office, we will continue fighting to ensure our trans neighbors are safe.
Amy @amyserwinowski
This was my perspective too and I've seen little of it in the reacts. Did he overreach? Maybe. Did he just have his kid stalked, and told people not to doxx him, and they did it anyway? Yes. I don't think there is any scenario more forgiving of a bit of overreach than that.
Doxxing has never been part of free speech so of course it is not contradictory for Musk to ban the ones who doxxed. Before you read this and think to yourself that it wasn't doxxing because it was public record, dig deeper. It was not public records alone that led to the man on the hood of the car. Elon had a PIA and was flying in a private jet not a public one. Sweeny knew both of these things, bragged about it, and continued. This is illegal and doxxing by definition. Also please ask yourself, even if it wasn't illegal, is it right? Should this posting people's public flight records online be legal? Should people's personal info (besides criminal record) be online at all? Why do we call it personal if it is not personal? I ask you to forget your career, political affiliation, and opinion of Musk for a moment and just answer as a fellow human. Is it right?
Musk made a fair and rational decision which you and all other rational people affirm, yet multiple times you explicitly doubt his future intentions and commitment to free speech. You are genuine and fair in your writing, so can you please explain which actions caused you to be so pessimistic about Elon’s commitment to free speech? Based on what he has done so far at great personal cost, should he not get the benefit of the doubt until he actually makes decisions contrary to his commitment? Your pessimism seems unwarranted and unfair.
Just want to point out something that I think is VERY important.
From the article;
“The Twitter Files remain a vital revelation—evidence of a systemic attempt by Twitter executives to shape public debate and even political outcomes.”
While it is true that there was a systemic attempt by Twitter executives to ‘shape public debate and even political outcomes’ there is something not mentioned that is a hell of a lot more important.......
IT WAS ALSO A SYSTEMIC ATTEMPT BY THE FBI TO SHAPE PUBLIC DEBATE AND POLITICAL OUTCOMES......
In other words, the FBI was giving in-kind contributions to the Democratic Party by censoring and disrupting their opponents.
WTF ????