zlacker

>>crbela+(OP)
> Twitter, which was arguably the hub of wokeness

This is a fake news. Research shows that Twitter algorithmic amplification favored right-wing politics even before Musk made it even worse. See: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2025334119

> On the other hand, the people on the far left have only themselves to blame; they could tilt Twitter back to the left tomorrow if they wanted to.

Being this much clueless in pg's position is not possible. I can only assume he's consciously lying. He can see front row what Musk does with Twitter and how the "free speech" he's supposedly defending is actually "what Musk likes to hear speech", and he perfectly knows Musk is strongly aligned with the far right that he supports however he can all over the world. See for example: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/europe/article/2025/01/10/musk-dou...

>>p4bl0+Ke1
Sorry, can you back this up with some data and specificity?

I understand that you feel Musk is aligned with the far right; my question is what exactly is Musk doing with twitter, and (other than when people take the piss against him personally) how is he removing free speech that is not "far right"?

I'm genuinely interested in the details -- and they are hard to come by.

>>vessen+sk1
I can. Before he owned twitter, if someone called me the n-word or other racial slurs, action was taken. Now when that happens and I report it, they reply to tell me no rules were broken

>>blactu+zo1
I'm sorry to hear you're called slurs. They seem endemic for my kid as well as soon as you move out of ultra progressive areas; as a white parent of a black kid, it's disheartening and eye opening to find out just how racist some families are, and how immensely wide spread it is.

That said, I don't think this qualifies as newly minted removal of speech. It is the allowance of speech that was formerly removed.