Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks Twitter

Musk Says He Would Reverse Twitter's Permanent Ban on Trump (bloomberg.com) 405

Twitter was "foolish in the extreme" in kicking former US President Donald Trump off its service, and permanent bans should be extremely rare, said Elon Musk, who has agreed to acquire the social media company. From a report: "I would reverse the permanent ban," Musk said Tuesday at a Financial Times conference. "Perma bans just fundamentally undermine trust in Twitter as a town square where everyone can voice their opinion." Booting the former president off the site "didn't end Trump's voice," Musk said. "It will amplify it among the right. This is why it is morally wrong and flat-out stupid. My opinion, and Jack Dorsey I want to be clear shares this opinion, is that we should not have permanent bans," Musk said, referring to the Twitter co-founder and former chief executive officer.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Musk Says He Would Reverse Twitter's Permanent Ban on Trump

Comments Filter:
  • Lies (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:21PM (#62520112)
    Free speech is fine and all, but when people lose the ability to fact check for themselves and start feeling like abject lies are the solution to solve the problems in their life, we have to be honest about what effect that has on the society we live in.
    • Re:Lies (Score:5, Insightful)

      by v1 ( 525388 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @02:50PM (#62520552) Homepage Journal

      Trump was doing no better than the classic "yelling FIRE! inside a crowded movie theatre" and then whining about his free speech being violated. Not only was he deliberately misinforming people, he was inciting violence. And to top it off, he's got a large mob (and no, I'm not using a metaphore, an ACTUAL mob) of fanatical followers that he wields like a weapon.

      And that's not even considering that Twitter isn't the government, and isn't bound by the laws that exclusively restrict government behavior. They're a private business, doing the right thing. Which is in might short supply lately with big businesses in America!

      His actions are the poster-child of why freedom of speech has to have a few very specific practical exceptions. I support his ban 100%.

  • Magic is gone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:23PM (#62520122)

    Whatever the opinion on whether he should have been banned or not it's pretty clear even if he returns to Twitter a lot of people have moved on and he's got nothing new to bring.

    It was one thing when he was a candidate and using Twitter in such a direct manner was new for a candidate, and then for President but now we are re-treading the same territory. His demeanor isn't going to change and even if he did come back it's a pretty high chance that it will be a large amount of griping over the 2020 election still and a large part of the electorate just doesn't care anymore. You can even see a number of politicians basically deeming the election fraud issue a liability in their races.

    If he comes back a lot of the media (and yes the "liberal" media will love it, it's sensationalism) and some Twitter users will love it, some will hate it but it won't be the phenomenon that it was in 2015/16. I just don't think the man is capable of growing and adapting to that degree. His base will always enjoy it though.

    • Re:Magic is gone (Score:5, Insightful)

      by splutty ( 43475 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:53PM (#62520282)

      If he hadn't been a 'person of importance', he'd been temporarily banned so many times he'd effectively be permanently banned to begin with.

      He can't keep to the rules as laid down by Twitter to begin with, so the whole thing is fairly irrelevant, except as an example that some people get preferential treatment for things someone else would be immediately banned for.

    • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @02:35PM (#62520490)
      I hardly think the magic is gone. He still brings in tens of millions of dollars in regular donations and can draw a few thousand people to a rally in the middle of nowhere to crawl through mud to see him.

      With all due respect I think you're denying reality because like a lot of us you're afraid of the violence he's going to incite once he gets his platform back. And I honestly think you should be afraid of that. About 1/3 of the country seems ready to go on a violent revolution ending in a fascist dictatorship. We need to stop pretending it's all going to be okay.

      I mean I literally just saw a Twitter thread of a woman who miscarried discussing how terrified she was when she realized a doctor was asking her questions to determine if she had had an abortion and potentially report her for having committed a homicide under the new laws that are coming. People don't realize how bad things are about to get.

      Go look up some pictures of Afghanistan in the 1970s before the Taliban and right wing extremists took over there. And then go look up some pictures of the Taliban and the state of Afghanistan today. I'm not exaggerating when I say that's the direction about a third of the country wants to take us into.

      The problem is what I'm saying sounds so crazy that everyone wants to reach for the mod button because it's really hard to face what's going on here unless you're one of the people who wants to make it happen.

      As the saying goes, it can't happen here.
      • by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @03:51PM (#62520808)

        I'm not denying that but I think in reality the Trump base is smaller then it was in 16/20 but that just means the remaining group are louder than ever. I am not saying his base isn't any less active or out for blood than they were before, probably more so, but those independents and suburban voters are kinda over it and two years on bringing up the 2020 election as he is likely to do isn't going to bring them back.

        Trump got 74 million but Biden got 81 and to be clear, Biden did not get 81 million so much as Trump energized that many to get out and vote against him. 2020 was absolutely contentious but I think just pure fatigue helped the result. Trump being President was exhausting and even so for many of his supporters even if they would never say it. I think most of his base is probably a bit more comfortable sitting back and bashing Biden and the Democrats from saefty than being out front having to defend every nutty trip he was on that week.

        Trump is going to run on the 2020 fraud idea no matter what, he cannot let it go, and that's a losing position to defend for him and his supporters. It's nowhere near as compelling for the centrists as his 2016 issues. He has it easy now not being on Twitter, everyone can project themselves onto him, once he starts talking again it will be old hat and hnestly seeing his current rallies it's all a bit boring.

        I am certainly not discounting the danger he represents, his base is crazed and a bit cornered but he still has what is likely a more grueling primary ahead of him than in 16, even if he will still be the nominee. Every other Republican is gong to make the case that you don't want to go back to that time, that they will do the things he said but not be so, Trumpy about it. Maybe it will sell, probably not but he is not the out of left field machine he was in 16, in my opinion.

        • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @03:57PM (#62520828)
          And neither did the reasons they voted for Trump. Authoritarianism and fascism are both on the rise in America. I'm sorry but sticking our heads in the sand like an ostrich isn't going to help.

          Go look into what Ron DeSantis is doing over in florida. He's preparing for a presidential run and he's not an idiot like Trump was. If Ron DeSantis had been there for January 6th we would all be calling him dear leader at this point.

          The next time we put in authoritarian in the White House is the last election we're going to see in our lifetimes. We're right at the edge and if we let it happen again that's it for democracy. We are their face facts or we give up democracy. At this point it really is your call
  • by k6mfw ( 1182893 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:23PM (#62520124)
    if anyone writes something critical or negative of Musk. I've seen this happen in many space forums, if not banned then downvoted to oblivion.
  • If banning Trump didn't mute his voice, why is Musk complaining about free speech being limited by social media content moderation? Because a lot of people wanted to hear what Trump had to say, his banning from some popular platforms didn't inhibit his ability to communicate to his audience.

  • by Voice of satan ( 1553177 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:27PM (#62520150)

    I do not agree. Since Trump has been kicked out of Twitter he has lost much of his trolling power. And his political work is mostly trolling. I don't like bans and anti-free speech stuff but the guy used twitter to incite unlawful behaviour. That is outside the bounds of free speech.

    • by kyoko21 ( 198413 )

      If you keep yelling fire in a crowded theater, at a point, there comes a line that must be drawn...

      Where that line is... that's hard to say.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

      IMHO, "inciting violence" is a B.S. crime. If I post "Kill Voice of satan 1553177" and somebody does it, the only crime committed was the murder, not the speech. People are responsible for their own actions. By blaming the messenger, the violent masses not only get away unpunished, but with a feeling that it isn't their fault because they were victims of the crime of inciting violence. They can continue their violent behavior in another context.

      P.S. Your user name works absolutely hilariously into my ex

    • I don't like bans and anti-free speech stuff but the guy (Trump) used twitter to incite unlawful behaviour.

      What tweet(s) did he post that were meant to incite unlawful behavior?

      • Every tweet claiming the election was stolen without evidence was a DIRECT attack on the democratic process.

  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:28PM (#62520152)

    Trump sued, and lost, when he tried to block people from replying to his post. He tried to censor people. Good he got a taste of his own medicine. The right wing never allows dissent on their websites. Post any counterpoints on Alex Jones website and you get banned, while he allows Sandy Hook deniers on there under the banner of allowing free speech. Try getting past Hannityâ(TM)s call screeners to get on his FCC protected radio show. The right wing called for a government take over of Twitter calling it an essential service, while strongly opposing Net Neutrality. Fucking hypocrit bastards.

    • Censored, my ass, all Twitter users have the privilege of excluding users from their feed. I submit that's in a different category from having them deplatformed altogether.

  • But it did make it significantly more difficult to reach as many people that quickly. This "laws don't stop crime so why have laws" attitude perplexes me.
  • ... she need to send up a spacecraft to take a picture to see her ass. Are we enriched by this uncensored opinion from the public square, Elon?
  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:35PM (#62520184)

    Trump is Emperor Palpatine, we knew that. But what is surprising is that Elon Musk is transforming from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader. He’s forgotten how carbon credits, which were a gift from the left, got Tesla out of its darkest days. He won't recall that nowadays or even express any kind of appreciation. The traditional car makers didn't throw a big hissy fit like he threw when they recently got credits for using union labor. As did bailout money (which he paid back, but doesn’t change the fact he was given the money at the time he thought he needed it.) Nowadays he is so far gone to the right that he even seemingly pandered to climate change skeptics. He went from proclaiming himself a socialist as recently as 2016 to being a full-on right-wing extremist in 2022. Heck as recently as last year he even said he doesn’t want Trump back. But now he is in full right-wing appeasement mode. He claims he is center but if so, why isn’t he saying or doing things that anger the right wing? He is also displaying signs of paranoia common with right-wing nuts. I mean The Onion made one joke about him and he permanent-cancelled them. If this were truly about free speech, that would be cool. But realistically we know that right-wingers are the kings of censorship. I mean whenever I post comments on right winger websites like Alex Jones .. I get banned pretty quickly. Meanwhile he leaves whacko Sandy Hook denial comments on there saying he doesn't want to censor free speech, That's how Republicans operate. They want their own free speech, God forbid you try to counterpoint any of their misinformation. They claim counterpoints to their lies as "censorship" and remove those.They opposed net neutrality, but wanted twitter declared an essential service and taken over. Meanwhile healthcare, food, and housing are not essential to those fuckers. He can't control his anger towards the extreme left and the result is total abandonment of centrist/humanist/left values and strong pandering to the right-wing. The measure is the fact that they all heap tons of praise on him. Wouldn't be surprised if Elon shows up at a Trump rally in 2024.

    • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:51PM (#62520262)

      Note what I consider extreme-left:

      Extreme left: You get canceled for using the wrong pronoun without malicious intent.
      Left: Unintentional misgendering is OK. Acknowledge that gender is a spectrum. Which it is, btw, gender is controlled by hundreds of genes and variants of transcription factors such as SRY which may or may not always be on the Y-chromosome.

      Extreme left: Tax unrealized gains of ownership in companies.
      Left: Tax income. Tax high income at a large percent.

      Extreme left: Immediately get rid of ALL fossil fuels and halt anything that has the word nuclear.
      Left: Phase out fossil fuels, regulated nuclear power plants and nuclear fusion research is OK.

      Extreme left: Cancel someone for unintentional bias.
      Left: Educate people to eliminate their biases.

      Extreme left: Do not use robots for anything, hire only union labor.
      Left: Use robots, and improve worker conditions. Government should implement UBI based on taxation of corporate profits and robot usage.

      Extreme left: Halt all space exploration activities because rockets are too loud and use fuel.
      Left: Continue to explore space, and minimize environmental impact where possible.

    • I think you're mistaking someone sharing some opinions with right-wing extremists with someone actually being a right-wing extremist. I could make a similar [bad] argument for people that share some ideas with the radical left. In both cases, sharing some opinions is not a sufficient reason to attack them as belonging to a particular group.

      Free speech used to be a core component of democratic societies. It scares me to see people grouping anyone supporting actual free speech with extremists plotting insurre

  • by AmazingRuss ( 555076 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:36PM (#62520190)
    ... but only if trump can't block people. Free is free.
  • by Dracos ( 107777 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:36PM (#62520194)

    Bizzaro-world statements like this is why I can't respect Musk.

    Trump is toxic, inciteful, and deliberately mal-informs for his own gain, on top of being a monumentally stupid puppet. He has his own platform now which is doing better than he deserves.

    The right to free speech does not include the right to be heard. Not that this is a free speech issue because the First Amendment only prevents the government from silencing people.

  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:37PM (#62520198) Homepage Journal

    "Perma bans just fundamentally undermine trust in Twitter as a town square where everyone can voice their opinion."

    Point the first, Twitter is not a town square, unless that town is a company town. Anyone who ever thought it was is a dumbfuck.

    Point the second, you can literally be banned from an actual town square if you abuse the privilege of being there enough times. For example in California they can place a three year "permanent" restraining order (odd definition of permanent, but anyway) for civil harassment, or five years for domestic abuse. That is not a permanent ban, but just try going back and doing what got the order placed against you the first time and see if it happens again — it will. Courts don't like it when you don't take them seriously.

    Point the third, Twitter doesn't achieve several of its stated goals if it has Trump on the service. To wit:

    [...]principles:
    Promoting health
    Earning peopleâ(TM)s trust
    Making it straightforward
    Uniting profit and purpose
    Being fast, free, and fun

    Trump deliberately spread health disinformation, so he conflicts with the first of those things. Trump used Twitter to spread many other types of disinformation as well, so for both of those reasons he conflicts with the second thing. Straightforward, eh, what does that even mean? On the relevant page they say "Our product, our behavior, and our work habits should all be transparent and to the point." This is clearly bullshit, the algorithms are not transparent. This is the one and only place Musk's stated objectives would improve Twitter. The profit and purpose thing is allegedly about doing good; Trump uses social media to bolster his borderline fraudulent fundraising schemes (like where people who thought they were donating to help him achieve political goals were just paying down his debt) so he conflicts with that regardless. And most of us (literally, as polled) do not find Trump's attacks on democracy to fit into that either.

    It seems obvious that Musk is interested in Twitter only to help Trump. It's obvious why a richie rich mofo like Musk would want to boost Trump, he is guaranteed to shit on the poor for the benefit of the wealthy. And it should also be obvious that nothing Musk says about Twitter should be taken at face value. Everything he says is contradictory to facts.

    • I rather think Musk is playing the useful idiot here. He hates Trump but thinks it would be fair to let him spit his nonsense. Musk has already stated that in his opinion the U.S.A needed more moderate politicians and Trump is not at all a moderate.

      • I rather think Musk is playing the useful idiot here. He hates Trump but thinks it would be fair to let him spit his nonsense.

        What makes you think that? Are you new?

        Musk has already stated that in his opinion the U.S.A needed more moderate politicians and Trump is not at all a moderate.

        Your mistake, assuming you're not just being disingenuous, is believing literally anything Musk says. Why would you do that? Did you fall off the turnip truck last night?

    • Wow..just...wow.

      I've seen you on here a LONG time, and while we disagree on a lot, I've found some areas of common ground and generally think you are an intelligent individual.

      But seriously, do you really believe all of this that you wrote, especially at the end there?

  • by Verdatum ( 1257828 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @01:38PM (#62520204)
    I'm open-minded about the possibility of creating a digital public square; meaning a medium that gives you the same rights as protected speech in a public park. But twitter is the absolute wrong mechanism for implementing it. It's fundamentally designed to get people to bicker, but not actually communicate. And if we want to do a public square, we need to update laws to explicitly designate which services we choose to implement as a public square, and leave the left to implement moderation and meta-moderation as they see appropriate. I do not want to drink from the firehose, and I do not want celebrities voices be so strongly boosted over everyone else.

    And banning Trump from Twitter didn't silence him, but it did make things massively more peaceful. At least so far, I'm alright with him sticking to his little echo-chamber.

    • I'm open-minded about the possibility of creating a digital public square; meaning a medium that gives you the same rights as protected speech in a public park.

      What does that have to do with this? Willful disinformation designed to harm people and threats of violence will both get you not only kicked out of the park (and maybe a restraining order against you prohibiting you returning for some years, especially if you engage in these activities repeatedly) but also potentially sued, jailed, etc. depending on the nature of the acts.

      • Iminent plausible threats of violence is not protected speech. Lying is potentially protected speech, but you can be sued for defamation. But if you can afford it, you can go right back to the park and do it again.
    • Reinstatement just adds an air of legitimacy to the lies and dissent he peddles for his own personal benefit. Are they going to exempt him from the TOS everybody else has to adhere to or will they ban him again if let back in?

  • Usually the people spouting conspiracy bullshit in the town square are denigrated/ignored/shunned (effectively banned by society) or escorted away by authorities and taken somewhere to get help/shelter/food. Perhaps Twitter should offer Mental Health services to users who regularly incite riots or warning of impending race wars or push flat earth theories or fake moon landings, lizard people etc.
  • Why wouldn't he say he will do it. Of course if he is doing all this as a distraction he will figure a way out of the purchase.
  • I'm really hoping this to be another blow to end the privacy-violations and disregard for users from "social media" (aka "private corporations").

    Let's them burn Facebook/Meta, Twitter and alike.

  • have already moved onto whatever other chat forum they think will allow them to freely, collectively dissociate from reality. They aren't coming back to Tritter. It's now part of the "fake news" that doesn't happen to coincide with their fantasies. Once you contradict a Trumpeter in their beliefs, there's no going back.

    This is not about free speech. Everyone is free to walk into a park and shout their political views at the top of their lungs. The question is who gets the trillion-fold megaphone that th
  • by mrwireless ( 1056688 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2022 @03:05PM (#62520602)

    According to Popper free speech is not a linear function ("more is better"), it's a bell curve with an optimum ("not too much, not too little").

    The real question I'd love to see Musk engage with is: where does that optimum lie? His absolutist stance might indeed amplify some voices, but is just as likely to hurt others. My worry is that Twitter might gain polarising loudmouths but lose the softspoken voices:

    - I don't want to hear from politicians, I want to hear from the refugee who fears speaking out against the regime in his home country because doing so might hurt the family members who still live there.
    - I don't want to hear celebrities, I want to hear from the single mom who fears speaking up about abortion because it might cost her a job opportunity.

    You could argue that "the right wing white male who is afraid to voice his worries about immigration" is another soft voice that Twitter might amplify. I can only say that for me personally, as a European, I'm amazed how far the USA's Overton window has shifted to the right already. The notion that the right is somehow repressed seems strange to me, as American politics don't have a left to speak of. For example, Bernie Sanders would be considered much more middle of the window/road here.

    Elon is plenty smart, so I really hope his mental model of how a free speech climate can be cultivated is a bit more complex than he's been leading on.

    Paradox of Tolerance:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    Overton Window:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

A bug in the hand is better than one as yet undetected.

Working...