Musk, X, and Trump 2024: Where are the Legal and Ethical Boundaries?

[SassyIrishLass]

Berg's TDS is off the charts, don't be like Berg

 

[ThisIsMe]

For repeated violations of policy.

Twitter has suspended President Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said.

“In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action.”

Twitter’s decision followed two tweets by Trump Friday afternoon that would end up being his last. The tweets violated the company’s policy against glorification of violence, Twitter said, and “these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks.”

Twitter bans President Trump permanently

Twitter has suspended President Donald Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

www.cnn.com

Ironic, they cite context, yet ignore any semblance of context.

 

[marvin martian]

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, is actively using X (formerly Twitter), the social media platform he bought in 2022, to promote his far-right political interests. Vittoria Elliott at WIRED writes that Musk has made the platform “his own personal political bullhorn.” Tech journalist Casey Newton says that X is now “just a political project.”

Even before his endorsement of former President Donald Trump in July, Musk had already changed X in substantial ways that favor MAGA politics and personalities. He restored accounts of far-right figures such as white nationalist Nick Fuentes and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, relaxed content moderation policies, and disposed of much of the company’s trust and safety and election integrity teams.

But after the endorsement, Musk’s efforts on behalf of the Trump campaign appeared to surge. He launched a political action committee dedicated to Trump’s reelection. He hosted a livestream with the former president, whom Musk coaxed back onto the platform after he was previously banned for incitement to violence after the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S, Capitol. According to The New York Times, Musk “hired a Republican operative with expertise in field organizing” to help direct his political activities. And according to Trump, Musk has agreed to head a “government efficiency” task force that aims to make “recommendations for drastic reforms” across the entire federal government should Trump win a second term. All the while, Musk continues to promote his preferred brand of politics through posts on his own account, which has close to 200 million followers (and frequently appears in users’ feed as recommended content whether they follow him or not).

While it may be jarring for users and others who hoped the platform might not succumb so completely to the interests of its singular owner, it is Musk’s prerogative to shape X to his tastes. No social media platform is truly politically neutral. And it is not a novel circumstance that the singular owner of a platform has such extraordinary influence over its operations, policies, and political decisions. But Musk’s use of X to try to influence the 2024 U.S. election is the most extreme example to date of a person in his position using a major social media platform for a specific political outcome. It is so blatant and outside the norm, it can be considered a class of its own.

Musk, X, and Trump 2024: Where are the Legal and Ethical Boundaries?

The limits and ability of social media companies to influence the outcome of elections.

www.justsecurity.org

Attention Is the Fuel of American Politics, and Trump Knows It​

Washington is filled with lobbying offices and fund-raisers because powerful interests believe something is gained when dollars are spent. They are right. We have come to expect and accept a grotesque level of daily corruption in American politics — abetted by a series of Supreme Court rulings that give money the protections of speech and by congressional Republicans who have fought even modest campaign finance reforms. But we have at least some rules to limit money’s power in politics and track its movements.

The same cannot be said for attention. If Trump saves TikTok and, in return, TikTok boosts pro-Trump content before the 2026 elections to help it go viral, would that be illegal? Perhaps. But would we even know it had happened? If Elon Musk turns the dials on X to tilt the conversation in the Republican Party’s direction before the 2028 elections, who will stop him?

Opinion | Trump Has Something He Would Like to Bring to Your Attention

Attention is the fuel of American politics, and Trump knows it.

www.nytimes.com

Color me concerned that trump, who doesn't even have a passing regard for the law or ethical norms, already has the most powerful social media platform (as long as he and Elon don't have a falling out)) in his back pocket, owns one of his own, and has already been promoted on Tik Tok for thwarting a bipartisan law passed by Congress.

The influence of the combined, unchecked, disinformation being spewed on social media, far right internet sites, and cable propagandists like Fox, has never been seen before. It's an authoritarian's dream. But hey, I'm sure it will turn out okay.

The good news is we have precedent here; namely, the many years all the social media platforms carried water obediently and enthusiastically for the DemoKKKrat party; whether it was the Russia hoax, covering up Biden's mental decline, Covid fascism, amplifying the CIA's lies about Hunter's laptop, assists for Hamas supporters on college campuses, etc. We saw for years how Big Tech did the bidding of the DemoKKKrat party.

 

[jknowgood]

For repeated violations of policy.

Twitter has suspended President Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said.

“In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action.”

Twitter’s decision followed two tweets by Trump Friday afternoon that would end up being his last. The tweets violated the company’s policy against glorification of violence, Twitter said, and “these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks.”

Twitter bans President Trump permanently

Twitter has suspended President Donald Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

www.cnn.com

You mean the end of liberalism and the continuation of free speech.

 

[TNHarley]

to promote his far-right political interests

 

[Nostra]

And yet a manifestly unfit man won the presidency despite a litany of criminal indictments, a criminal conviction, serial sexual abuse, pathological lying, overt bigotry, ...............................

 

[luiza]

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, is actively using X (formerly Twitter), the social media platform he bought in 2022,

Big Bot Bugger crying that Musk is being a Bot in his view and that he is so unhappy because he has been Out-Botted by the Bot King .

 

[MisterBeale]

JUST IN: Ted Cruz Fires Back At Ed Markey's Amendment To Rein In Elon Musk And DOGE​

10 hours ago

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, is actively using X (formerly Twitter), the social media platform he bought in 2022, to promote his far-right political interests. Vittoria Elliott at WIRED writes that Musk has made the platform “his own personal political bullhorn.” Tech journalist Casey Newton says that X is now “just a political project.”

Even before his endorsement of former President Donald Trump in July, Musk had already changed X in substantial ways that favor MAGA politics and personalities. He restored accounts of far-right figures such as white nationalist Nick Fuentes and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, relaxed content moderation policies, and disposed of much of the company’s trust and safety and election integrity teams.

But after the endorsement, Musk’s efforts on behalf of the Trump campaign appeared to surge. He launched a political action committee dedicated to Trump’s reelection. He hosted a livestream with the former president, whom Musk coaxed back onto the platform after he was previously banned for incitement to violence after the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S, Capitol. According to The New York Times, Musk “hired a Republican operative with expertise in field organizing” to help direct his political activities. And according to Trump, Musk has agreed to head a “government efficiency” task force that aims to make “recommendations for drastic reforms” across the entire federal government should Trump win a second term. All the while, Musk continues to promote his preferred brand of politics through posts on his own account, which has close to 200 million followers (and frequently appears in users’ feed as recommended content whether they follow him or not).

While it may be jarring for users and others who hoped the platform might not succumb so completely to the interests of its singular owner, it is Musk’s prerogative to shape X to his tastes. No social media platform is truly politically neutral. And it is not a novel circumstance that the singular owner of a platform has such extraordinary influence over its operations, policies, and political decisions. But Musk’s use of X to try to influence the 2024 U.S. election is the most extreme example to date of a person in his position using a major social media platform for a specific political outcome. It is so blatant and outside the norm, it can be considered a class of its own.

Musk, X, and Trump 2024: Where are the Legal and Ethical Boundaries?

The limits and ability of social media companies to influence the outcome of elections.

www.justsecurity.org

Attention Is the Fuel of American Politics, and Trump Knows It​

Washington is filled with lobbying offices and fund-raisers because powerful interests believe something is gained when dollars are spent. They are right. We have come to expect and accept a grotesque level of daily corruption in American politics — abetted by a series of Supreme Court rulings that give money the protections of speech and by congressional Republicans who have fought even modest campaign finance reforms. But we have at least some rules to limit money’s power in politics and track its movements.

The same cannot be said for attention. If Trump saves TikTok and, in return, TikTok boosts pro-Trump content before the 2026 elections to help it go viral, would that be illegal? Perhaps. But would we even know it had happened? If Elon Musk turns the dials on X to tilt the conversation in the Republican Party’s direction before the 2028 elections, who will stop him?

Opinion | Trump Has Something He Would Like to Bring to Your Attention

Attention is the fuel of American politics, and Trump knows it.

www.nytimes.com

Color me concerned that trump, who doesn't even have a passing regard for the law or ethical norms, already has the most powerful social media platform (as long as he and Elon don't have a falling out)) in his back pocket, owns one of his own, and has already been promoted on Tik Tok for thwarting a bipartisan law passed by Congress.

The influence of the combined, unchecked, disinformation being spewed on social media, far right internet sites, and cable propagandists like Fox, has never been seen before. It's an authoritarian's dream. But hey, I'm sure it will turn out okay.

According to various sources funded by USAID...

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, is actively using X (formerly Twitter), the social media platform he bought in 2022, to promote his far-right political interests. Vittoria Elliott at WIRED writes that Musk has made the platform “his own personal political bullhorn.” Tech journalist Casey Newton says that X is now “just a political project.”

Even before his endorsement of former President Donald Trump in July, Musk had already changed X in substantial ways that favor MAGA politics and personalities. He restored accounts of far-right figures such as white nationalist Nick Fuentes and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, relaxed content moderation policies, and disposed of much of the company’s trust and safety and election integrity teams.

But after the endorsement, Musk’s efforts on behalf of the Trump campaign appeared to surge. He launched a political action committee dedicated to Trump’s reelection. He hosted a livestream with the former president, whom Musk coaxed back onto the platform after he was previously banned for incitement to violence after the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S, Capitol. According to The New York Times, Musk “hired a Republican operative with expertise in field organizing” to help direct his political activities. And according to Trump, Musk has agreed to head a “government efficiency” task force that aims to make “recommendations for drastic reforms” across the entire federal government should Trump win a second term. All the while, Musk continues to promote his preferred brand of politics through posts on his own account, which has close to 200 million followers (and frequently appears in users’ feed as recommended content whether they follow him or not).

While it may be jarring for users and others who hoped the platform might not succumb so completely to the interests of its singular owner, it is Musk’s prerogative to shape X to his tastes. No social media platform is truly politically neutral. And it is not a novel circumstance that the singular owner of a platform has such extraordinary influence over its operations, policies, and political decisions. But Musk’s use of X to try to influence the 2024 U.S. election is the most extreme example to date of a person in his position using a major social media platform for a specific political outcome. It is so blatant and outside the norm, it can be considered a class of its own.

Musk, X, and Trump 2024: Where are the Legal and Ethical Boundaries?

The limits and ability of social media companies to influence the outcome of elections.

www.justsecurity.org

Attention Is the Fuel of American Politics, and Trump Knows It​

Washington is filled with lobbying offices and fund-raisers because powerful interests believe something is gained when dollars are spent. They are right. We have come to expect and accept a grotesque level of daily corruption in American politics — abetted by a series of Supreme Court rulings that give money the protections of speech and by congressional Republicans who have fought even modest campaign finance reforms. But we have at least some rules to limit money’s power in politics and track its movements.

The same cannot be said for attention. If Trump saves TikTok and, in return, TikTok boosts pro-Trump content before the 2026 elections to help it go viral, would that be illegal? Perhaps. But would we even know it had happened? If Elon Musk turns the dials on X to tilt the conversation in the Republican Party’s direction before the 2028 elections, who will stop him?

Opinion | Trump Has Something He Would Like to Bring to Your Attention

Attention is the fuel of American politics, and Trump knows it.

www.nytimes.com

Color me concerned that trump, who doesn't even have a passing regard for the law or ethical norms, already has the most powerful social media platform (as long as he and Elon don't have a falling out)) in his back pocket, owns one of his own, and has already been promoted on Tik Tok for thwarting a bipartisan law passed by Congress.

The influence of the combined, unchecked, disinformation being spewed on social media, far right internet sites, and cable propagandists like Fox, has never been seen before. It's an authoritarian's dream. But hey, I'm sure it will turn out okay.

Legal and ethical constraints are in the bin.

 

[berg80]

Oh my....it was fine when zuck and dorsey were using their platforms for the bidding of the demo, and biden was telling zuck to censor people...it's bad now when repubs control these things?

I would ask why you folks constantly conflate harmful disinformation with free speech but I already know.

Supreme Court allows White House to press social media companies to remove disinformation​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/social-media-disinformation-supreme-court-ruling/index.html

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the White House and federal agencies such as the FBI may continue to urge social media platforms to take down content the government views as misinformation, handing the Biden administration a technical if important election-year victory.

Of immediate significance, the decision means that the Department of Homeland Security may continue to flag posts to social media companies such as Facebook and X that it believes may be the work of foreign agents seeking to disrupt this year’s presidential race.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I would ask why you folks constantly conflate harmful disinformation with free speech but I already know.

Supreme Court allows White House to press social media companies to remove disinformation​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/social-media-disinformation-supreme-court-ruling/index.html

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the White House and federal agencies such as the FBI may continue to urge social media platforms to take down content the government views as misinformation, handing the Biden administration a technical if important election-year victory.

Of immediate significance, the decision means that the Department of Homeland Security may continue to flag posts to social media companies such as Facebook and X that it believes may be the work of foreign agents seeking to disrupt this year’s presidential race.

Who determines what "misinformation" is? We are finding out now that it was, in fact, not misinformation.

 

[Lesh]

No, what they are actually saying is, conservative and right wing speech can't be allowed. If it is Marxist speech?

That's just fine.


That's what the marching orders are for all establishment news and media now.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz Says Free Speech Doesn't Apply to Far Right Positions​

Jan 21, 2025

Germany kinda has some experience with right wing hate speech … ya know?

 

[Lesh]

Who determines what "misinformation" is? We are finding out now that it was, in fact, not misinformation.

Wrong.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Wrong.

Huh, I could have sworn i saw articles that said social distancing and masks had little effect..

 

[Lesh]

Huh, I could have sworn i saw articles that said social distancing and masks had little effect..

Where’d ya see em?

Gatewaypundit?

 

[MisterBeale]

https://archive.ph/hgbjf

Hospital Mask-Wearing Had Little Impact on COVID Transmission

Requirement to wear masks in hospitals may have little impact on COVID-19 transmission during Omicron wave UK study suggests.

www.medscape.co.uk

". . . After the CDC and other agencies revised their guidance in April 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, by then a staunch advocate of masks, claimed that he and other officials had discouraged the public from obtaining masks to ensure there were adequate supplies for health care workers. Ever since, promoters of masking have cited Fauci’s “noble lie” to account for the abrupt reversal of prior guidance. But as Miller notes, it was not just during the early months of the pandemic that officials said masks were ineffective. They had said so for years, and Fauci had advised against masks not just in public statements but in private emails in early 2020.

In light of the earlier consensus, Miller’s findings in Unmasked should not be surprising. As we might have predicted based on a plethora of trials and meta-analyses published prior to the pandemic, mask mandates have had little to no demonstrable impact on curbing the spread of the virus. Miller reaches this conclusion by comparing areas with mask mandates of longer and shorter duration with each other and with areas that never imposed mandates at all. The results, he shows, simply do not support the standard adage that “masks save lives”.

https://unherd.com/2022/02/were-masks-a-waste-of-time/

 

[ThisIsMe]

Where’d ya see em?

Gatewaypundit?

Public Email

le.utah.gov

The C.D.C. concedes that cloth masks do not protect against the virus as effectively as other masks. (Published 2022)

The update in guidance comes as coronavirus cases continue to soar.

www.nytimes.com

These articles suggest the cheap cloth masks were not very effective at stopping covid.

Loading…

fox40.com

6 foot rule was inadequate.

COVID ‘6-feet’ social distancing ‘sort of just appeared,’ likely lacked scientific basis, Fauci admits

Dr. Anthony Fauci confessed to lawmakers Tuesday that guidelines to keep six feet of separation — ostensibly to limit the spread of COVID-19 — “sort of just appeared” withou…

nypost.com

6 foot rule not based on scientific data.

 

[berg80]

The clear answer to the question posed in the OP is..........there are no boundaries of any kind this admin feels an obligation to obey. It's a rogue government.

 

[Lesh]

Public Email

le.utah.gov

The C.D.C. concedes that cloth masks do not protect against the virus as effectively as other masks. (Published 2022)

The update in guidance comes as coronavirus cases continue to soar.

www.nytimes.com

These articles suggest the cheap cloth masks were not very effective at stopping covid.

Loading…

fox40.com

6 foot rule was inadequate.

COVID ‘6-feet’ social distancing ‘sort of just appeared,’ likely lacked scientific basis, Fauci admits

Dr. Anthony Fauci confessed to lawmakers Tuesday that guidelines to keep six feet of separation — ostensibly to limit the spread of COVID-19 — “sort of just appeared” withou…

nypost.com

6 foot rule not based on scientific data.

Whatever. I don’t know why these particular orgs said what they said. Frankly I don’t care.

I understand why masks are a good idea and what “I” have read says they protect one from spreading or being infected. That’s good enough for me.

You don’t want to wear one in the middle of a respiratory pandemic that killed millions ? Fine. . Just stay the fuck away from me. Why you would do that … I have no idea. Why this became political… I have even less of an idea .