‘Free Speech Absolutist’ Elon Musk Temporarily Bans Journalists, As ‘Free Speech Absolutist’ Bill Ackman Threatens SLAPP Suit Against Journalists
from the free-speech-only-for-my-friends dept
On Tuesday morning, former politician Tulsi Gabbard, who had to have the 1st Amendment clearly explained to her by a judge after she filed a ridiculous lawsuit to restrict the free speech of others, announced that she had cut a deal with Elon Musk to bring a “news show” to ExTwitter. Hilariously, she claimed that she did this because “freedom of speech is a fundamental right in America” (again, a court had to teach her what that meant not that long ago).
At around the exact same time, “free speech absolutist” Elon Musk was busy banning a bunch of reporters from ExTwitter for saying things that upset him and his pal Bill Ackman.
The social media platform gave no explanation for the sudden purge, saying only that the accounts “violate the X rules.” The X rules prohibit violent or hateful speech, child exploitation, private information sharing, and fake information.
But the accounts in question do not post that kind of content. The reporters who were banned include Steven Monacelli, a journalist at the Texas Observer who covers extremism, and Ken Klippenstein, who covers national security for The Intercept. Last year, Klippenstein published a piece on the errors with Tesla’s self-driving feature, and Monacelli noted that X shadow-banned the Intercept author since then.
MintPress News reporter Alan MacLeod, who recently has extensively covered Israel’s approach to the war in Gaza, and leftist podcaster Rob Rousseau were also suspended Tuesday.
The accounts for @liamnissan, @zei_squirrel, and the TrueAnon podcast were suspended, as well. The @liamnissan account posts mostly comedic commentary, including criticisms of Musk. The TrueAnon podcast provides left-wing analysis of current political events and conspiracy theories.
The @zei_squirrel account is another left-leaning commentator who has been critical of Musk in the past. In a post on their Substack Tuesday, the @zei_squirrel writer noted that they had recently begun to criticize Bill Ackman, a hedge fund billionaire and friend of Musk’s who helped lead the campaign against former Harvard University President Claudine Gay. Ackman’s wife was recently accused of plagiarism, the same charge that brought down Gay.
For what it’s worth Ackman has been going on a bit of a bender lately following the accusations of plagiarism against his wife. He’s been making up nonsense about how in the “early days” of 2009 no one thought there was anything wrong with straight up copying Wikipedia without attribution, which is just wrong. Wikipedia uses a CreativeCommons Attribution-ShareAlike license, which means it expects “attribution.” And was not, in any way, in the early days in 2009.
Still, Ackman, who helped push the witch hunt against Claudine Gay over her speech, and who is now threatening to file a laughably bogus SLAPP defamation suit against Business Insider for reporting on his wife’s alleged plagiarism — suggesting his support for “free speech” is a bit questionable as well — also falsely claims that Elon Musk is somehow a supporter of free speech. I mean, the content excerpted in two separate tweets just days apart is something else (I’d post screenshots of the tweets, but Ackman uses ExTwitter like it’s a blog and posts what appear to be trillion-word tweets.)
So, first he claims (falsely) that because MIT’s integrity handbook didn’t explicitly call out Wikipedia until 2013, it was okay to copy text directly from Wikipedia until then, and that this might somehow be defamatory (it is absolutely not):
To be clear, Neri did not use Wikipedia as a source, but only for the definitions of 15 words and/or terms for her dissertation.
While there was no way for us to do this research in the 91 minutes we were given before Business Insider published its story, our lawyers found it in about 24 hours.
This finding wipes away 15, or more than half of the plagiarism claims made by Business Insider at 5:19pm last Friday night.
According to the Cornell Law Legal Information Institute: In order to prove “prima facie defamation,” “a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.”
This leads me to a few question for the @X legal community. If you look at all of the evidence that has emerged over the last few days, do you think Neri has been defamed under the four factor test above?
As multiple people pointed out to him in response, the actual standard for defamation of a public figure is actual malice, and he claims (again, not understanding the law) that because his wife is “an intensely private person” that makes her not a public figure, which is also… not how any of this works.
Anyway, just days earlier, Ackman went on a different rant (also about his wife) in which he concludes two ponderously long tweets that no one actually read in full with:
Lastly, if X was not independently controlled and governed by a free speech absolutist, Neri and I would not have had the ability to respond in a rapid fashion in a public forum where free speech is allowed, encouraged, and respected. I would also not have had the ability to reach millions of people with what I believe are important messages.
And I would not have been able to be nearly as effective in my campaign to help save the higher education system in our country, and I represent just one of hundreds of millions of grateful users.
So thank you @elonmusk !!! and thank you @lindayaX for holding strong
And, the two “free speech absolutists” are pushing each other to file a lawsuit to silence free speech they dislike:
Eventually, Elon unbanned the accounts after a nonsense peddler asked him what was happening, and Elon promised “to investigate.” He later claimed that they “do sweeps for spam/scam accounts and sometimes real accounts get caught up in them.”
Of course, this is what plenty of people (such as myself) pointed out about mistakes that were made in the past under Twitter’s old management, and people like Elon insisted that it couldn’t possibly be mistakes, and was all about ideological censorship.
The simple fact is, any platform has to do some level of moderation, and as soon as you do that, you’re going to make mistakes. I’d give Elon and ExTwitter the benefit of the doubt that this was just a mistake if (a) he had done that to previous management, though he did not and (b) if the accounts in question weren’t all found to have recently criticized Elon and/or Bill Ackman.
Given Elon’s own unwillingness to give the benefit of the doubt to others, why should we give him the benefit of the doubt here?
Either way, Elon is free to do whatever he wants on his platform. But absolutely no one should be under the illusion that what he’s doing has anything even remotely related to “defending free speech.” He is making decisions based on his own personal whims and foibles, which includes an extraordinarily warped sense of free speech that permits suing critics.
Filed Under: bill ackman, content moderation, defamation, elon musk, free speech, journalists, neri oxman, slapp suits, tulsi gabbard
Companies: twitter, x
Comments on “‘Free Speech Absolutist’ Elon Musk Temporarily Bans Journalists, As ‘Free Speech Absolutist’ Bill Ackman Threatens SLAPP Suit Against Journalists”
And the best part is, that the display name @liamnissan used – Sissy SpaceX – is still trending.
If we believe Yoel Roth, he failed to make Musk understand the Streisand effect. Will this incident teach him something or?..
Right wingers only claim to be pro free speech because they don’t want their speech blocked. When in positions of power, they do exactly what left wingers do and block speech they don’t like. People who are truly pro free speech are a critically endangered species.
Re:
To wit: Book bans. No one can seriously tell me that a liberal/leftist organization—up to and including the DNC—is out to ban books at anywhere near the same rate (or for the same reasons) as the GOP and right-wing groups like Moms For Liberty.
Re:
Well, no. Not exactly the what left wingers do. It’s been conclusively demonstrated that the right wing repeatedly gets away with speech whose left-wing counterparts would be censored. This is the case even when dealing with bog-standard liberals.
I’m frankly terrified of how deep this false equivalence might go in your mind.
Re: Re:
The above comment has a certain both sides smell to it.
In my admittedly limited experience, the right wing folks censor speech they disagree with while the left wing folks censor speech that violates law, TOS, contract, etc.
Re: Re: Re:
People of all political stripes take ideological stances on what speech is acceptable on their platforms. That right-leaning platforms tend to openly accept (and sometimes even promote) bigoted speech far more than left-leaning platforms do isn’t an accident, though.
Re: Re:
Just to add, I have not seen or heard about a new communist bloc or country after the Berlin Wall fell.
No, China isn’t Communist, at least in Marxist/Leninist/Maoist terms. No, North Korea isn’t communist, despite what they claim.
And a lot of Latin America isn’t as politically relevant as the white supremacists who wish to revive the CSA think they are.
Re: Re: It’s been conclusively demonstrated
wow … maybe we shoudn ‘t speak about the left and right. I’m not guilty of a bunch of crazy bullshit the religious right did in the 80’s and 90’s. 700 club, tami fey baker, and mega churches .. pedo priest’s I’m sure there is a bunch more.
But i’ve alway leaned right and am mostly conservative. and i’ve had to eat alot of fucking crow. Iraq Jr, cheney , rummy pure evil .. but much of that crow was done in hindsight .. becuase I try and live by principle ..not party. I come here top get informed ..and i certainly do ..great scoop’s inside stuff … but yall are wacked out lefty’s who arn;’t necessarily wrong .. but your not fuckng helping anything with your serous resentment for the right.. it .. just .,.. saddens me “sigh”
Re: Re: Re:
To be clear, there are many conservatives who are fine. It’s mostly the Republican Party that has become toxic.
Re: Re: Re:2
Fuck that noise, I’m not taking that risk.
They took abortion away from us, you really want to assume that they’re not going to take lesbian marriage next?
Conservatives have to go, or we are fucking doomed.
Re:
Minor but important correction:
When in positions of power, they do exactly what they claimed left wingers do and block speech they don’t like.
If only we had a solution
If only they could put in a system that verifies these notable accounts so they could be excluded from spam sweeps along with a nice indicator to other users that they’ve checked these accounts.
Probably a bad idea though.
Re:
So is gutting the solution by turning it into a “paid subscription service” that benefits scammers more than anyone who actually needs it.
Then again, it’s Elon Musk. He doesn’t know shit.
This guy is a billionaire?
Much like asking Reddit for legal advice, you get what you pay for.
Academic Integrity at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2006) says that plagiarism is
Under “What should I cite?”, it includes the following:
And later:
I think MIT students can be expected to be smart enough to know that Wikipedia is a website.
Re:
How dare you insult Bill Ackman’s wife like that!
Re: Re:
Great, now he’s going to start coming here and regularly post diatribes longer than my average comment.
Cue Techdirt story commenting on Gizmodo’s story on ExTwitter’s ChatGPT problem.
Whole buncha ChatGPT bots replying, essentially, “I can’t do that, Dave” to twitter posts…
Re:
Apologies, could not find the link on Gizmodo. Did find the story on BoingBoing, though.
“To be clear, Neri did not use Wikipedia as a source, but only as a source.”
The same handbook I quoted above lists an “online dictionary” as a specific example of how to cite an electronic source (p. 10).
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Maybe regime propagandists should start contemplating why so many people (powerful and not powerful) distrust and despise them. via Gallup:
Americans’ Trust In Media Remains Near Record Low
Why do you think that is, Mike?
Re:
It’s a combination of—among other factors—right-wing propaganda telling people to distrust “mainstream media”, numerous mainstream journalism outlets practicing “view from nowhere” journalism, and 24-hour news networks prioritizing in-the-moment opinions from talking heads on the same five stories all day while fucking over deeper coverage of stories that deserve more (and better) coverage than a mention on the bottom line of a chyron.
Re:
Mainly because the media is pretty bad? I mean, I criticize the media all the time. It’s not surprising that trust is low in media, and it would be great if the media learned some lessons from that.
But I fail to see what that has to do with, well, anything in this particular discussion.
Emphasis mine.
Does… does this mean that LARP-ing (or what ever the online equivalent is) is not allowed on Twitter (and I guess talking about it either)?
Re:
As long as you suck up to Elon, anything is fine.
It’s easy to forget the one rule that rules them all: He who has the gold makes the rules.
Corollary: I’m rich, so none of those rules apply to me.
2nd Corollary: I’m rich, so my opinion is more important than yours.
3rd Corollary: I’m rich, so I’m right and you’re wrong.
“Free speech for meeeeeee but not for theeeeee!”
‘It was a complete and total coincidence that for the… ah hell I lost count, let’s just go with twenty-third time in a row a routine purge of spam and bot accounts just so happened to take out a bunch of accounts that Elon didn’t like because they were saying mean things about him.’
I repeat...
… MAKE BILLIONAIRES EXTINCT!
It’s been conclusively demonstrated
wow … maybe we shoudn ‘t speak about the left and or right. I’m not guilty of a bunch of crazy bullshit the religious right did in the 80’s and 90’s. 700 club, tami fey baker, and mega churches .. pedo priest’s I’m sure there is a bunch more.
But i’ve alway leaned right and am mostly conservative. and i’ve had to eat alot of fucking crow. Iraq Jr, cheney , rummy pure evil .. but much of that crow was done in hindsight .. becuase I try and live by principle ..not party. I come here to get informed ..and i certainly do ..great scoop’s inside stuff … but yall are wacked out lefty’s who aren’t necessarily wrong .. but your not fuckng helping anything with your serous resentment for the right.. it .. just .,.. saddens me “sigh”