Does twitter agree that the comments were hateful, did that not change? If didn't change, then twitter agrees they were hateful comments and twitter is now happy to have them on the platform.
Musk can't keep his foot out of his mouth here it seems.. it's very confusing.
I personally, don't believe in eternal bans. I always hate the horror stories where someone has made a mistake and thus Google bans them from all non-related activities for life, then bans the account of anyone who gave that person privileges too.
With respect to Twitter, I'd say sure Trump is an insurrectionist and a shameful individual, but it's been 2 years... while we can't all rightly forgive him, we can at least him speak his thoughts in 280 characters or less.
They are entitled to that stance, and advertisers uncomfortable with either the actual or anticipated results of that stance are entitled to not advertise on Twitter.
That these previously banned users were banned for conduct that they would consider hateful
That banning users is the only way to keep the platform safe from hateful conduct
If twitter disagrees with either of these statements, you can see why they would disagree with your point
For Musk to not lose gobs and gobs of money, it only matters whether advertisers, in their sole estimation, consider those people hateful. The guys with the nine figure ad budgets will almost certainly fall on the "cautious" side of that line.
The only thing that will help here is finding small, less PR minded brands or businesses to replace the players in the nine figure club. This won't be easy, but I think it is the only reasonable way forward to create the kind of Twitter that Musk seems to want to create. Having worked at "DDB Need'em" long ago, I'd set his chances of pulling that off relatively low, but I don't think it's impossible.
Or, more accurately, “content they don’t want their advertising seen near”.
My partner runs a small business that spends a few million on ads each year.
Why would she take the risk (and it is a huge risk) of advertising on Twitter when Facebook, Google etc. give her the confidence and results her business depends on. Smaller businesses are far less likely to take risks.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a company with an ad budget of a few million is a "small business" anymore.
At least some of the banned deserve a second chance. Those who were total monsters will probably be quickly re-banned. Others have found their own echo chambers elsewhere and won't even bother coming back.
Which is basically what you described and therefore is already how it works.
https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...
"As the Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin noted on Twitter, the suspended users include Chad Loder, an antifascist researcher whose open-source investigation of the U.S. Capitol riot led to the identification and arrest of a masked Proud Boy who attacked police officers. The account of video journalist Vishal Pratap Singh, who reports on far-right protests in Southern California, has also been suspended."
"All four accounts had been singled out for criticism by Andy Ngo, a far-right writer whose conspiratorial, error-riddled reporting on left-wing protests and social movements fuels the mass delusion that a handful of small antifascist groups are part of an imaginary shadow army called “antifa.” In a public exchange on Twitter on Friday, Musk invited Ngo to report “Antifa accounts” that should be suspended directly to him."
https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...
Please provide evidence that accounts like Chad Loder were posting about imminent, direct actions to riot. I followed that account pretty closely for the last month and saw none of that.
I would think about your comment because this is pretty defamatory.
That said, Loder is not a particularly nice person. He loves to both encourage violence and do violence to anyone who doesn't share his politics.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
5. https://archive.ph/2z4Dd (The photo is of Aaron Danielson, who was murdered by Michael Reinoehl, a member of antifa.)
"All four accounts had been singled out for criticism by Andy Ngo, a far-right writer whose conspiratorial, error-riddled reporting on left-wing protests and social movements fuels the mass delusion that a handful of small antifascist groups are part of an imaginary shadow army called “antifa.” In a public exchange on Twitter on Friday, Musk invited Ngo to report “Antifa accounts” that should be suspended directly to him."
https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...
doesn't that just mean someone who doxes people they don't agree with? Great, i'm glad he helped arrest a criminal but the ends don't always justify the means.
... no?
It seems to me a reasonable course of action to ban people violating restraining orders on your website. I do suspect the restraining order is being misapplied here, but that maybe isn't twitters responsibility to determine? Not sure how I feel about that since twitter is aiming to be pro free-speech and this case specifically seems to be a free-speech issue. I could go either way, but I don't know enough about this Loder person, maybe he isn't high profile enough to warrant in-depth thought about his ban and otherwise would be unbanned in the name of free speech? I certainly would be more likely to think he would be unbanned if he was a right-wing activist, though, but I don't know that I've seen substantial evidence here that shows a banning bias as this particular ban could be entirely justified.
With a propaganda weapon as powerful as Twitter, it's probably better for everybody if it's destroyed, rather than continues to be used/abused to escalate political divisions by either side of the great divide. And that seems to be the way things are going.
It should never have been taken so seriously to begin with.
[0]: https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-algorithm-crackdown-...
At first I hoped Musk would see the nightmare, give up, just pull the plug, and go home. I think that's out though, now I hope it collapses under its own weight. Hope dies last.