ReportWire

Tag: social media

  • Dumpy, the giant frog that went viral on TikTok, is actually fake — well, kinda | CNN

    Dumpy, the giant frog that went viral on TikTok, is actually fake — well, kinda | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A video of a massive, banana-guzzling frog, easily the size of its owner’s head, garnered over 20 million views on TikTok. But it was all thanks to movie magic, according to its creator.

    The video inspired shock and amazement. Posted to TikTok on Thursday, the clip shows videographer Lucas Peterson touching and feeding a huge amphibian named Dumpy.

    But, as the Minnesota-based content creator explained to CNN, Dumpy, a 4-year-old Australian green tree frog, is actually only about the size of his palm. Peterson edited the video in Adobe Premiere to make him appear much larger.

    There are also a “whole lot of perspective tricks going on” to help the video appear realistic, Peterson said.

    He said he hoped to inspire debate over whether or not the clip was real – this kind of ambiguity increases engagement on his content. “It causes a question and more interaction, debate over whether it’s real or fake,” he said. He previously posted a similarly edited video of the supersized frog.

    But still, he was surprised by the massive reach of Thursday’s enlarged Dumpy video. “I didn’t expect people to go that wild over a giant frog,” he said.

    Peterson explained that the video was edited in the description of the original TikTok, writing: “His real size is about 4-5 inches he’s enlarged with vfx perspective tricks. I did all my editing in adobe premiere.” However, his disclaimer was buried around halfway into the video description – and as Peterson told CNN, copies of his original video without the caption also began circulating on TikTok, Twitter and Instagram, leading many viewers to believe the clip was real.

    But the video’s viral fame has given Peterson an opportunity to share information about his semi-aquatic pets, he said. He maintains a “paludarium,” a kind of enclosed terrarium with aquatic features, that is home to Dumpy and two salamanders.

    “This opened the door to help educate people about how great tanks and amphibians are,” he said. “It’s kind of a niche hobby.”

    In the future, he plans to release more content starring Dumpy and his other amphibians. “Dumpy is still the same loveable frog you see on the screen, the only thing that’s different is he was enlarged,” he said.

    So, while you don’t have to watch out for oversized frogs anytime soon, you might want to watch out for some editing in the next unbelievable viral video you see.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk may want a WeChat for the world. It won’t be easy to build | CNN Business

    Elon Musk may want a WeChat for the world. It won’t be easy to build | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN Business
     — 

    Elon Musk is taking inspiration from China’s top social media platform, WeChat, while planning a future for Twitter. And while he has shared very few details of his ambition for an app for everything, experts say it won’t be easy to achieve.

    The Tesla

    (TSLA)     CEO said late Tuesday that he wanted to create a new app called “X” after buying Twitter.

    “Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app,” he tweeted.

    Musk’s comment came on the heels of news that he had once again reversed course and decided to follow through with his bid to buy Twitter for $44 billion, a price originally agreed back in April.

    The acquisition would put the world’s richest man in charge of one of the most influential social networks around, after months of acrimony and bitter U-turns.

    Now, Musk’s intention to build out what’s assumed to be a multipurpose platform has drawn comparisons to “super-apps” in Asia, essentially one-stop shops that do it all for users.

    Several tech companies in the region have already succeeded with their own versions of such applications. Chief among them is WeChat, the platform that is owned by Chinese tech giant Tencent

    (TCEHY)     and sometimes described as Facebook

    (FB)    , Twitter

    (TWTR)    , Snapchat

    (SNAP)     and PayPal

    (PYPL)     all rolled into one.

    More than a billion users, primarily in mainland China, rely on the social network to do virtually everything — from ordering groceries to booking a yoga class to paying bills — without leaving the app.

    Elsewhere in Asia, people have also flocked to apps such as Grab (GRAB) in Singapore and Malaysia, or Line in Japan. Grab was initially best known as a ride-hailing service provider, while Line gained popularity as a messaging app, and both have since branched out significantly to offer other features.

    Musk has not been shy about his desire to emulate the success of WeChat. In June, at a town hall with Twitter employees, he compared the American company’s potential to that of Tencent’s ubiquitous service in China.

    “I think an important goal for Twitter would be to try to include as much of the country, as much of the world, as possible,” said the billionaire businessman. “You basically live on WeChat in China because it’s so usable and helpful to daily life, and I think if we can achieve that, or even get close to that at Twitter, it would be an immense success.”

    Musk isn’t the only prominent US tech leader taking cues from China: Previously, Facebook

    (FB)     CEO Mark Zuckerberg also suggested that WeChat should be a case study for his company.

    For now, Musk has yet to outline his plans for X. But analysts say he would face numerous challenges.

    First: the fiercely competitive landscape. To some extent, WhatsApp, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and practically “everything” are trying “to become super-apps as well,” said Ivan Lam, a senior research analyst at Counterpoint Research based in Hong Kong.

    “To try to become a super-app, it’s actually very hard,” he said in an interview.

    Xiaofeng Wang, a principal analyst at Forrester who focuses on digital marketing and engagement strategies in Asia Pacific, echoed that view, noting that the industry had only become more saturated in recent years.

    “When WeChat first launched extended services beyond social, there weren’t that many established competitors in related businesses yet,” she told CNN Business.

    “For example, when WeChat Pay was first launched, there [weren’t] any well-established mobile payment services in China yet … While in the US, there are already PayWave, Apple Pay, Google Pay, PayPal, Venmo.”

    Companies trying to branch out in the sector could also face considerable pushback from policymakers, according to Wang.

    “The more flexible regulatory environment in China at the time gave internet companies like Tencent and Alibaba more room to extend to a wide range of businesses. WeChat benefited from that and grew into a super-app,” she said.

    “It would be a lot harder now, given the stricter anti-monopoly regulations in China and it would be certainly harder for Twitter or the future X to do that in the US,” she added.

    Perhaps the core challenge, however, is simply trying to be everything for everyone.

    Lam noted that many successful “super-apps” have typically targeted specific audiences, making it easier to tailor a suite of services to their needs. That would be tough to replicate globally — and could mean that Twitter or X would need to also focus on certain regions to get off the ground, he said.

    Musk has acknowledged the uphill battle. On Tuesday, a Twitter user posited that “it would have been easier to just start X from scratch,” prompting the billionaire to respond that Twitter was an important part of the plan.

    “Twitter probably accelerates X by 3 to 5 years, but I could be wrong,” Musk wrote.

    Wang said that Forrester’s research had shown there were fundamental differences in how Western and Chinese users viewed social media, making it harder for Western companies “to build the same level of trust.”

    “Putting the ambitions aside, it may be a lot more difficult to create a super-app like WeChat in the West,” she concluded.

    — Clare Duffy contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Thai police investigating CNN crew’s coverage of attack

    Thai police investigating CNN crew’s coverage of attack

    [ad_1]

    UTHAI SAWAN, Thailand — Thai police are investigating a report that a CNN crew inappropriately entered the day care center while reporting on the aftermath of the massacre in the building that left more than 20 preschoolers dead, authorities said Sunday.

    Danaichok Boonsom, head of the local township administration, told reporters that he had submitted his report alleging unauthorized entry onto the government property and that police were investigating.

    “Let the legal process run its course, I don’t want to disclose all the details,” he said as he left the Na Klang district police station in northeastern Thailand. “Let the police do their work investigating.”

    Authorities began looking into the incident after a Thai reporter posted an image on social media of two members of the crew leaving the scene, with one climbing over the low wall and fence around the compound, over police tape, and the other already outside.

    CNN tweeted that the crew had entered the premises when the police cordon had been removed from the center, and were told by three public health officials exiting the building that they could film inside.

    “The team gathered footage inside the center for around 15 minutes, then left,” CNN said in its tweet. “During this time, the cordon had been set back in place, so the team needed to climb over the fence at the center to leave.”

    The tweet came in response to criticism from the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand, which said it was “dismayed” by CNN’s coverage and the decision to film the crime scene inside.

    “This was unprofessional and a serious breach of journalistic ethics in crime reporting,” the FCCT said.

    The Thai Journalists’ Association criticized CNN’s actions as “unethical” and “insensitive,” and called for an internal company investigation of the incident in addition to the official Thai probe.

    Deputy national police chief Surachate Hakparn said the two journalists entered Thailand on tourist visas, which had now been revoked. He said they had been detained pending their expulsion from the country, but refused to provide further details.

    In the attack Thursday, police said 36 people, 24 of them children, were killed by a former police officer who was fired earlier this year on drug charges and had been due in court on Friday.

    As Thailand’s worst such massacre ever, the attack drew widespread international media attention to the small town of Uthai Sawan in the country’s rural northeast. By Sunday, few remained but a large number of Thai media continued to report from the scene.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s bumpy road to possibly owning Twitter: A timeline | CNN Business

    Elon Musk’s bumpy road to possibly owning Twitter: A timeline | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN Business
     — 

    A board seat accepted and then rejected. A stunning $44 billion takeover offer with uncertain financing. And a surprise early morning tweet putting the deal on hold, temporarily.

    Even by the standards of Twitter, a company that has known plenty of chaos and dysfunction in its history, the weeks-long effort by billionaire Elon Musk to buy the company has proven to be uniquely tumultuous – and there’s no clear end in sight.

    Should the deal go through, it would place the world’s richest man in charge of one of the world’s most influential social media platforms. The acquisition has the potential to upend not just Twitter itself but politics, media and the tech industry. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO has repeatedly stressed that his goal is to bolster what he calls “free speech” on the platform, by which he means all legal speech that complies with local laws in the markets where Twitter operates. He has also said he would reverse Twitter’s ban of former President Donald Trump.

    But the attempt by Musk, a wildly successful entrepreneur with a history of erratic behavior, to buy Twitter has been viewed with some skepticism from the start. On the day he made his offer, Musk said: “I’m not sure I’ll actually be able to acquire it.” Some have questioned how he would finance the deal, especially as shares of Tesla

    (TSLA)    , which he’s partially using to back his financing of the Twitter deal, and the broader tech sector have declined in the weeks since.

    After Musk recently said he was temporarily pausing the deal so he could assess the amount of spam and fake accounts, it prompted speculation that the billionaire might be looking to renegotiate the deal – or back out of it entirely. His actions in the days that followed only reinforced that thinking.

    Here is a look back at the many twists and turns in one of the most high-profile tech deals in recent memory.

    Musk starts quietly buying up Twitter shares, building his stake in the company. But it would be months before he disclosed this fact to the public.

    Musk’s stake in Twitter tops 5%, but that fact is not disclosed until the following month. Musk was obligated to disclose his stake within 10 days of crossing the 5% threshold, but waited 21 days to do so. During that time, he continued building up his stake.

    The billionaire begins to make pointed statements about the platform from his account. “Twitter algorithm should be open source,” he wrote, with a poll for users to vote “yes” or “no.”

    The following day, Musk tweets out another poll to his followers: “Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy. Do you believe Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?”

    Musk reaches out to Twitter cofounder and former CEO Jack Dorsey to “discuss the future direction of social media,” according to a company filing later put out by the company. The two tech founders are known to have a bit of a billionaire bromance on and off Twitter.

    Twitter’s board and some of its leadership team meet with representatives from Wilson Sonsini, a law firm, and J.P. Morgan to discuss the possibility of Musk joining the company’s board, according a later securities filing. Dorsey is said to have told the board that “he and Mr. Musk were friends,” according to the filing.

    In the meeting, the Twitter board discussed wanting Musk to agree to “‘standstill’ provisions”,” according to the filing. This would effectively “limit his public statements regarding Twitter, including the making of unsolicited public proposals to acquire Twitter (but not private proposals) without the prior consent of the Twitter Board.”

    Musk is revealed to be Twitter’s largest individual shareholder, with a more than 9% stake in the company.

    News of the purchase sends shares of the social media company soaring more than 20% in early trading and kicks off a wave of speculation about how Musk might push for changes on the platform.

    Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal announces Musk will join Twitter’s board of directors. “Through conversations with Elon in recent weeks, it became clear to us that he would bring great value to our Board,” Agrawal says in a post on Twitter.

    As part of the appointment, Musk agrees not to acquire more than 14.9% of the company’s shares while he remains on the board. His term on the board is set to go through 2024, according to a regulatory filing.

    Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal (left) and former CEO Jack Dorsey in an undated photo.

    Agrawal announces that Musk has decided not to join the board after all. “I believe this is for the best,” Agrawal writes in a letter to the Twitter team.

    The reversal opens the door for Musk to pursue a greater stake in the company – and frees him to tweet his many thoughts about the company.

    Musk stuns the industry by making an offer to acquire all the shares in Twitter he does not own at a valuation of $41.4 billion. The cash offer represents a 38% premium over the company’s closing price on April 1, the last trading day before Musk disclosed that he had become the company’s biggest shareholder.

    “I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy. However, since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company,” Musk writes in his offer letter. “Twitter has extraordinary potential. I will unlock it.”

    Twitter’s board of directors adopts a “poison pill” provision, a limited-term shareholder rights plan that potentially makes it harder for Musk to acquire the company.

    Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks during the official opening of the new Tesla electric car manufacturing plant on March 22, 2022 near Gruenheide, Germany.

    Musk lines up $46.5 billion in financing for the deal, including two debt commitment letters from Morgan Stanley and other unnamed financial institutions and one equity commitment letter from himself, according to a regulatory filing.

    The billionaire also reveals that he has not received a formal response from Twitter a week after his acquisition offer. He said he is “seeking to negotiate” a definite acquisition agreement and “is prepared to begin such negotiations immediately” — an apparent reversal from his statement in his acquisition offer letter that it would be his “best and final” offer.

    Although he is the richest person in the world, much of Musk’s wealth is tied up in Tesla stock, and some followers of the company speculate that it could be challenging for Musk to raise debt against the historically volatile stock.

    Twitter announces that it has agreed to sell itself to Musk in a deal valued at around $44 billion. At a conference later in the day, Musk describes his offer to buy Twitter in characteristically sweeping terms as being about “the future of civilization,” not just making money.

    At an all-hands meeting that afternoon, Twitter employees raise questions about everything from what the deal would mean for their compensation to whether former US President Donald Trump would be let back on the platform.

    Filings reveal Musk sold $8.5 billion of his Tesla stock in the three days after Twitter board agreed to the sale for an average of $883.09 per share. The filings did not disclose the reason for the sale, but Musk appeared to be raising funds to buy Twitter.

    Tesla cars sit in a dealership lot on March 28, 2022 in Chicago, Illinois.

    Musk raises another $7 billion in financing for the deal. The new investors include Oracle founder Larry Ellison, cryptocurrency platform Binance and venture capital firm Sequoia Capital, according to a filing.

    Musk aims to increase Twitter’s annual revenue to $26.4 billion by 2028, up from $5 billion last year, according to a New York Times report, citing Musk’s pitch deck presented to investors. To achieve that lofty goal, Musk intends to bolster Twitter’s subscription revenue and build up a payments business while decreasing the company’s reliance on advertising sales, according to the report.

    Musk confirms what many have assumed for weeks: he would reverse Twitter’s Trump ban if his deal to buy the company is completed.

    “I do think it was not correct to ban Donald Trump, I think that was a mistake,” Musk said. “I would reverse the perma-ban. … Banning Trump from Twitter didn’t end Trump’s voice, it will amplify it among the right and this is why it’s morally wrong and flat out stupid.”

    Former President Donald Trump looks at his phone during a roundtable with governors on the reopening of America's small businesses, in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, June 18, 2020.

    Twitter confirms to CNN Business that the platform is pausing most hiring and backfills, except for “business critical” roles, and pulling back on other non-labor costs ahead of the acquisition. In addition, Twitter says general manager of consumer, Kayvon Beykpour, and revenue product lead, Bruce Falck, are leaving the company.

    Musk tweets that the deal is on hold, linking to a Reuters report from nearly two weeks earlier, about Twitter’s most recent disclosure about its amount of spam and fake accounts. The figure cited in the report, however, is in line with prior quarterly disclosures.

    “Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5% of users,” Musk tweeted.

    Shares of the social media site plummet after Musk’s announcement, dropping more than 10% at market open. Two hours after announcing the hold, Musk says he remains set on purchasing Twitter. “Still committed to acquisition,” he wrote.

    Later in the day, Musk says his team is testing Twitter’s numbers and “picked 100 as the sample size number, because that is what Twitter uses to calculate

    Musk tweets out that Twitter’s legal team accused him of breaking a nondisclosure agreement when the billionaire revealed the platform’s sample size for automated user checks is allegedly just 100 users.

    “Twitter legal just called to complain that I violated their NDA by revealing the bot check sample size is 100! This actually happened,” wrote Musk.

    The standoff over bot accounts continues as Musk exchanges a series of tweets with Agrawal over the issue. After Agrawal carefully explains how Twitter attempts to combat and measure spam accounts, Musk responds with a poop emoji.

    Musk follows up with a somewhat more thoughtful question. “So how do advertisers know what they’re getting for their money?” Musk asked. “This is fundamental to the financial health of Twitter,” he added.

    Musk announces that his acquisition of Twitter “cannot move forward” until he sees more information about the prevalence of spam accounts, claiming that the social media platform falsified numbers in filings. Without citing a source, he claims in a tweet that Twitter is “20% fake/spam accounts” and suggests Twitter’s previous filings with the SEC were misleading.

    Later in the day, Musk posts a poll to his Twitter followers: “Twitter claims that >95% of daily active users are real, unique humans. Does anyone have that experience?” before calling on the SEC to evaluate the platform’s numbers. “Hello @SECGov, anyone home?” Musk tweets, in an apparent attempt to get the regulator to look into the matter.

    In a statement, Twitter says it remains “committed to completing the transaction on the agreed price and terms as promptly as practicable.” Later, the company says it intends to “enforce the merger agreement.”

    In a letter to Twitter’s head of legal, Musk threatens to walk away from his purchase of the platform, alleging that Twitter is “actively resisting and thwarting his information rights” as outlined by the deal.

    In the letter, an attorney for Musk accuses the social media company of breaching the merger agreement by not providing the data he has requested on Twitter spam bots, stating that the lack of information gives him a right “not to consummate the transaction” and “to terminate the merger agreement.”

    Musk moved to terminate the acquisition agreement. A lawyer representing him claimed in a letter to Twitter’s top lawyer that the company is “in material breach of multiple provisions” of the deal over its alleged failure to provide all the data Musk says he needs to evaluate the number of spam and fake accounts on the platform.

    “For nearly two months, Mr. Musk has sought the data and information necessary to ‘make an independent assessment of the prevalence of fake or spam accounts on Twitter’s platform,’” the letter reads. “This information is fundamental to Twitter’s business and financial performance and is necessary to consummate the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement. … Twitter has failed or refused to provide this information.”

    Twitter was not having it.

    “The Twitter Board is committed to closing the transaction on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and plans to pursue legal action to enforce the merger agreement,” Twitter board chair Bret Taylor said in a tweet Friday, echoing earlier statements by the company that it planned to follow through with the deal. “We are confident we will prevail in the Delaware Court of Chancery.”

    Twitter sued the Tesla billionaire in Delaware court in an attempt to force him to complete the deal.

    The 62-page lawsuit, sprinkled with memes, tweets and a poop emoji, effectively highlighted the bizarre spectacle of the deal from the start. The company paints Musk as a non-serious potential owner — alleging at one point that he has “disdain” for the company, and at another saying, “Musk’s strategy is … a model of bad faith” — while seeking to compel him to become its owner. (Twitter’s board has an obligation to its shareholders to try to see the deal through if they believe it is in their best interest. The dispute could also end in a settlement.)

    Twitter’s lawsuit against Musk over his move to terminate their $44 billion acquisition agreement will go to trial on Oct. 17 and run for five days, a Delaware judge ruled.

    The decision came after Judge Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, who is overseeing the case, previously ruled in Twitter’s favor that the proceedings could be expedited and take place in October. Twitter initially pushed for an October 10th start.

    Musk’s legal team had asked for the trial to take place in 2023. Twitter’s legal team argued it was necessary to expedite the case in order to limit the “harm” to its business and to ensure the deal can be completed before Oct. 24, the “drop dead” date by which the two sides had previously agreed to close the deal.

    Peiter

    Twitter whistleblower Peiter “Mudge” Zatko testifies before Congress in his first public appearance after his bombshell allegations against the social media company were reported in August by CNN and The Washington Post.

    In a whistleblower disclosure sent to multiple lawmakers and government agencies in July, Zatko accused Twitter of failing to safeguard users’ personal information and of exposing the most sensitive parts of its operation to too many people, including potentially to foreign spies. Zatko — who was Twitter’s head of security from November 2020 until he was fired in January — also alleged company executives, including CEO Parag Agrawal, have deliberately misled regulators and the company’s own board about its shortcomings.

    Zatko claimed in his testimony that Twitter is extremely vulnerable to being penetrated and exploited by agents of foreign governments, as well as detailed some of the personal information Twitter collects on users and alleged that the company does not know where the majority of its collected data goes.

    Days earlier, a judge allowed Musk’s legal team to add arguments based on the whistleblower disclosure to its case.

    Musk sends a letter to Twitter proposing to complete the deal as originally signed for $54.20 per share, citing people familiar with the negotiations. News of the letter, revealed in a security filing the next day, sends Twitter stock surging more than 20%, approaching the deal price for the first time in months.

    Such an agreement could bring to an end a contentious, months-long back and forth between Musk and Twitter that has caused massive uncertainty for employees, investors and users of one of the world’s most influential social media platforms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kanye West’s Instagram account restricted, returns to Twitter | CNN

    Kanye West’s Instagram account restricted, returns to Twitter | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    After being suspended by Meta on Friday, Kanye West posted on Twitter for the first time in nearly two years – a move celebrated by Elon Musk, who is in the process of buying the social media network.

    West, who has legally changed his name to Ye, tweeted a photograph of a hat that said 2024. Musk responded with his own tweet, reading “Welcome back to Twitter, my friend!”

    West last posted on Twitter in November 2020, just after the last US presidential election. Following his first tweet on Friday, West posted another one which included a picture of himself with Meta Platforms Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg, accusing him of kicking him off Instagram.

    In a statement to CNN Business on Saturday, a Meta spokesperson said content from West’s account was deleted for violating the company’s policies and a restriction was placed on his account. It did not specify what was objectionable about the content or what kind of restriction was imposed.

    The move comes after West shared a since-deleted post that included a screenshot of a text conversation with Sean “Diddy” Combs that was criticized by the American Jewish Committee as “anti-Jewish.”

    West was previously suspended by Instagram for 24 hours in March for directing a racial slur at “Daily Show” host Trevor Noah.

    Earlier this week, West stirred controversy for wearing a “White Lives Matter” shirt and dressing several Black models in shirts with the same phrase, deemed a “hate slogan” by the Anti-Defamation League, at his fashion show in Paris.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mandela Barnes has signaled support for removing police funding and abolishing ICE — despite ad claiming otherwise | CNN Politics

    Mandela Barnes has signaled support for removing police funding and abolishing ICE — despite ad claiming otherwise | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Wisconsin Democratic Senate nominee Mandela Barnes has previously signaled his support for removing police funding and abolishing ICE, according to a review by CNN’s KFile, despite claiming otherwise in a recent ad in which he speaks directly to the camera to defend his record on those issues.

    “Look, we knew the other side would make up lies about me to scare you. Now they’re claiming I want to defund the police and abolish ICE. That’s a lie,” says Barnes to the camera in a recent 30-second television ad called “Truth.”

    But a CNN KFile review of Barnes’ social media activity and public comments he made in interview appearances reveal a different and more nuanced picture in which Barnes often signaled his support for such positions.

    In multiple posts from 2018 uncovered by CNN, Barnes liked tweets that criticized the immigration agency and called to abolish them. He told a group that supported abolishing the institution in 2019 that the “wrong ICE” was melting and attended one of their “Abolish ICE” local rallies.

    This week, Barnes pushed back on attacks on his record on criminal justice and crime, saying he wouldn’t be “lectured on crime” by Republicans, citing the January 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol in which more than 100 police officers reported injuries.

    Barnes, the lieutenant governor of Wisconsin, fielded another attack Friday night from incumbent Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, with whom he is locked in a tight race. The outcome could determine control of the US Senate next year.

    “He has a record of wanting to defund the police,” Johnson said of Barnes during a debate. “And I know he doesn’t necessarily say that word, but he has a long history of being supported by people that are leading the effort to defund, who uses code words like (Missouri Democratic Rep.) Cori Bush said, talking about reallocate over bloated police budgets.”

    Barnes shot back that Johnson didn’t have any concern for the “140 officers that were injured in the January 6 insurrection.” Johnson in turn said that he “immediately and forcefully and have repeatedly condemned (the Capitol riot) and condemned it strongly.”

    Though Barnes has never outright embraced the “defund the police” slogan, he has on numerous occasions said he supports redirecting or decreasing police funding – even before the slogan gained popularity in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd by police.

    In one 2020 interview reviewed by CNN, Barnes told a local Wisconsin public radio show that funding should go to social workers and a “crisis intervener or a violence interrupter,” instead of police.

    Maddy McDaniel, spokesperson for the Barnes campaign, said he does not support defunding the police or abolishing ICE.

    “As independent fact-checkers have verified, Lt. Governor Mandela Barnes does not support abolishing ICE or defunding the police.”

    In previously unreported activity on social media reviewed by CNN’s KFile, Barnes repeatedly liked tweets about abolishing ICE.

    He liked one September 2018 tweet that used the “#AbolishICE” hashtag and compared the agency to “modern day slave catchers.” His Twitter account also liked other tweets calling for abolishing ICE twice in July 2018 and twice in June.

    “Imagine a world without ICE,” read one of the tweets liked by Barnes.

    Barnes also once solicited an “Abolish ICE” T-shirt on Twitter in 2018 writing, “I need that,” when offered the Democratic Socialists of America-branded shirt. A photo of Barnes holding a similar shirt later circulated on social media. Barnes told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, which first reported on the shirt, he was not part of the abolish ICE movement saying “no one slogan can capture all the work we have to do.”

    While speaking to the Wisconsin-based immigration group Voces de la Frontera Action in 2019, Barnes alluded to calls to get rid of the immigration enforcement agency.

    “We’re bringing science back. We’re bringing science back for the next generation. We’re bringing science back because the wrong ICE is melting,” Barnes said.

    In June of 2018 at a different event from the group, Barnes attended what was labeled a protest to “top the Indefinite Imprisonment of Families & Abolish ICE,” according to photos on his Facebook page.

    “Great turnout at Voces de la Frontera’s event to #protest President Trump’s #immigration policies at the Milwaukee Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office! However, there is more to do to ensure that immigrants’ rights – human rights – are protected. Let your voices be heard!” Barnes wrote on Facebook about the event, which featured the executive director of the organization calling for the abolishment of the agency.

    While he has never outright embraced the “defund the police” slogan, Barnes has long called for reforming or changing policing, especially in communities of color and reducing their budgets.

    Speaking in 2015 on a panel entitled “Civil Rights in the Age of Extremism,” Barnes called police officers who don’t live in communities in which they police an “occupying force.” He also advocated reducing police budgets even before the “defund the police” slogan became popular on the far-left in the summer of 2020.

    Which policies the “defund the police” slogan stands for are actively debated, with some arguing it means abolishing police departments all together, while others have embraced shifting police funding to other social services in the community. Barnes reiterated support for the latter in a 2012 survey for the organization Vote Smart where he indicated he supported slightly decreasing budgets for law enforcement and corrections.

    In early June 2020, Barnes said “defunding” police wasn’t as “aggressive” as it was portrayed, citing budget cuts to other social services.

    “Defunding isn’t necessarily as aggressive as a lot of folks paint it,” Barnes said. “You know, school budgets get cut almost every year.”

    When asked directly if he supported defunding the police, Barnes told Wisconsin public radio in late June 2020 that he thought funding for police was a “mismatch” compared to other services in the city.

    “You can look at the City of Milwaukee, for example, where 45% of the departmental allocations that goes to police while libraries are like two or three percent, neighborhood services, two or three percent,” Barnes said. “I think that you can look at that a, a priorities mismatch.”

    Barnes, comparing police budgets to money spent on prisons and the military, said the money could be better spent on social workers or violence interrupters.

    “We’re working to reduce our prison population, we’re very intentional about making that happen and it takes that intentionality,” he said. “It’s easy to look at the police department and say, ‘Well, yeah, we are spending a lot of money. How do we get smarter about this?’”

    “It becomes the conversation about needs,” he continued. “This isn’t about attacking the police. If anything, it’s about making their jobs easier by implementing programs … where we have services where they wouldn’t have to respond to things that aren’t crime, where they don’t have to respond to, you know, instances that would be better suited for a social worker or some sort of crisis intervener or a violence interrupter that would help, you know, uh, promote peace and communities in the first place.”

    “I think that’s where our funding should go,” Barnes reiterated. “What’s going on right now isn’t necessarily working, you know, police brutality is one thing – but in general, uh, the idea of promoting safer communities, I don’t, I don’t think that we’re doing a good job at that.”

    This story has been updated with additional developments Friday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Putin backers urge strong retaliation for Kerch Bridge blast

    Putin backers urge strong retaliation for Kerch Bridge blast

    [ad_1]

    KYIV — The fiery blast on the Kerch Bridge on Saturday triggered a chorus of calls for brutal retaliation against Ukraine among Russian public figures who support President Vladimir Putin. 

    The calls increase political pressure on Putin, who said in September that Moscow is ready to use “all available means” to protect the country and its people “if our country is threatened.”  
     
    “This is not a bluff,” Putin added, speaking during the announcement of the mobilization of 300,000 reservists for the war on Ukraine. 

    His statement triggered speculation among Ukraine’s Western backers about a possible deployment of tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian troops in case Kyiv is successful in its counteroffensive in four Ukrainian territories formally annexed by the Kremlin, or if Ukraine attempts to win Crimea back. Kyiv hasn’t claimed responsibility for the bridge explosion. 

    Sergei Markov, a Kremlin-connected politician and former parliamentarian with Putin’s United Russia party, believes that “the terrorist attack” on the Kerch Bridge is evidence that “the U.S. and its Ukrainian proxy regime will move the red line further and further.”  

    “No response from Russia? Even further. And again? Even further,” he wrote on social media, demanding a tough response from Moscow. 

    Konstantin Dolgov, a member of the upper house of Russia’s parliament, also branded the explosion “a terrorist attack” and “another sinister manifestation of the terrorist nature of the puppet Kyiv regime.”

    Referring to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Dolgov said: “Terrorists must be treated unequivocally!” 

    Rodion Miroshnik, who represented in Moscow until recently the Russia-backed Luhansk People’s Republic, wrote on social media that “undamaged Ukrainian bridges across the Dnieper river look ridiculous against the backdrop of a blazing Crimean bridge.” 

    The damage to the Kerch Bridge, which connects Russia with Crimea, the peninsula illegally annexed by Moscow in 2014, not only poses a problem to Russia’s supplies of manpower and weapons to its units in southern Ukraine. It is also a serious humiliation for Putin personally, having happened on the morning after his 70th birthday. 

    The explosion was also a slap in the face to propagandists in Russia’s state-controlled media, who have regularly used the bridge as a symbol of Russia’s successful annexation of Ukrainian territory. 

    Television journalist Vladimir Solovyov, sanctioned earlier this year by the EU for his propaganda activities, wrote in his Telegram channel: “It’s time to respond. By all means available.”  

    He said that Ukraine “must be immersed in dark times,” and urged Russia to destroy bridges, dams, railways, thermal power plants and other infrastructure facilities in Ukraine. According to international law, such deliberate destruction would be a war crime. The U.N. already said last month that Russia had committed war crimes in Ukraine including the bombings of civil areas and summary executions.

    Andrei Medvedev, a prominent television journalist and a vice speaker of the Moscow city council, said that “what will happen to us [Russia] depends, among other things, on the reaction [of the authorities] to today’s events.” 

    [ad_2]

    Sergei Kuznetsov

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s Private Messages with Billionaire Pals

    Elon Musk’s Private Messages with Billionaire Pals

    [ad_1]

    In Musk v. Twitter, a part of the business life of the richest man in the world is revealed. 

    Private messages exchanged with his inner circle immerse us into his process when he conceives an idea.

    The messages were released by the Delaware Chancery Court as part of the proceedings between the two parties. 

    The revelation of these private messages is undoubtedly one of the reasons which led the billionaire to put back on the table his offer to acquire the platform for $44 billion. And to demand that Twitter  (TWTR)  drop its legal action in exchange.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s Twitter acquisition isn’t a done deal yet | CNN Business

    Elon Musk’s Twitter acquisition isn’t a done deal yet | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Elon Musk appears to be closer to completing his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter than at any point since he first said the deal was “on hold” nearly five months ago. But it’s not a done deal yet.

    Musk earlier this week sent a letter to Twitter

    (TWTR)     proposing to move forward with the acquisition at the original price of $54.20 per share and suggesting the litigation over his initial effort to exit the deal be dropped. Twitter

    (TWTR)     replied saying it had received the letter and plans to close the deal on the originally agreed upon terms.

    But Twitter and Musk on Wednesday had yet to reach an agreement on ending the litigation, which would avert the trial that’s set to take place in less than two weeks, a person familiar with the negotiations told CNN. The source added it was unclear if the two parties would reach an agreement on Wednesday.

    The judge overseeing the case on Wednesday also filed a letter saying that neither party has moved to stay the proceedings in the case and “I, therefore, continue to press on toward our trial set to begin on October 17.”

    As it considers Musk’s revived acquisition proposal, Twitter must also think about how to avoid getting stuck in a situation where the billionaire pulls more shenanigans, and drags the process out even longer. That could mean continuing the legal fight, for now, or adding new provisions to the original contract.

    If Twitter does decide to play ball with Musk, the process could move fairly quickly — anywhere from days to weeks — because the deal already has the sign-off of regulators as well as Twitter shareholders and board members.

    For months, Musk has argued that he should be able to walk away from the deal because Twitter has misrepresented the number of bots and spam accounts on its platform, and later added additional claims from a whistleblower disclosure. Musk’s letter is likely a signal that the Tesla CEO and his lawyers had begun to doubt the likelihood of their success at trial, legal experts say.

    If Musk was going to end up being forced to buy Twitter either way, he may have decided it was better to do that before going to trial and presenting public defenses likely to say, in essence, “‘Twitter is such a horrible company that no one is going to want to work for it, own it, or do business with it,’” said Columbia Law School professor Eric Talley. If Musk had lost at trial, he could have also been forced to pay interest to Twitter for delaying the deal, ultimately making the acquisition more expensive, Talley said.

    Musk may have also “weighed the considerable inconvenience and arguable misery of his upcoming deposition, and decided enough was enough,” according to Widener University Delaware Law School associate professor Paul Regan. “That could also include a sober assessment from his own expert witnesses about the strength of the evidence to support his claim that Twitter significantly underestimated the number of bots or fake accounts.”

    Musk had been set to be deposed starting Thursday, according to a notice of deposition made public earlier this week. However, court filings released Wednesday suggest that Musk may have been trying to avoid deposition. In a letter to the judge dated Sept. 27, lawyers for Twitter said that Musk had agreed “after long resistance” to a two-day deposition starting on Sept. 28, but pulled out, citing “Covid exposure risk.” Twitter’s lawyers immediately sent a new notice to depose Musk starting on Oct. 6 “after any theoretical concern about exposure risk could justify delaying the deposition … Mr. Musk has refused to respond.”

    It’s not clear whether Musk and Twitter have now agreed to proceed with the deposition.

    Musk’s offer to proceed with the deal may not be enough to stop his deposition or the litigation from continuing. In his letter, Musk said he would move forward with closing the deal provided that the Delaware Chancery Court stays the proceedings. But Twitter may have little incentive to agree to such terms.

    “Twitter is probably going to say, look, we definitely want to engage you on this … but we’ve still got a trial on Oct. 17 and until this is signed, sealed and delivered, we’ve got to get ready for trial,” Talley said.

    Twitter has a few potential avenues to help ensure that Musk really does follow through with closing the deal this time, in addition to keeping up the pressure of the continuing litigation. Most likely, Talley said, the two sides could agree that Musk must deposit some portion of the $44 billion payment into an escrow account before hitting pause on the trial, which would immediately be paid to Twitter if Musk tries to pull out again.

    Perhaps the biggest wildcard as the two sides try to negotiate a deal is the lenders, chiefly Morgan Stanley, who agreed to provide $13 billion in debt financing to help Musk pay for the deal and will now have to pony up in order for the deal to close. Twitter is arguably even less valuable now than when the deal was first struck, after Musk has spent months making claims about its flaws and following broader social media and digital advertising market declines.

    “I have been waiting for the lenders to suddenly show up and say they’re no longer willing to fund the deal … we don’t know exactly where they are on this,” Talley said.

    It could be yet another factor that complicates the negotiations. However, like Musk, the lenders do have some legal obligations that could make it hard for them to walk away. And ultimately, if all the pieces are in place, experts expect Twitter to say yes to Musk’s deal.

    “I suspect that [Twitter’s] board will agree to suspend the litigation and accept the deal,” said Vanderbilt University finance professor Josh White. “The very public saga has certainly taken a toll on them and Twitter employees. It is best for all parties to finish the deal and make a quick and seamless transition.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Blast on Russia bridge to Crimea threatens Moscow supply route

    Blast on Russia bridge to Crimea threatens Moscow supply route

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    KYIV — The Kerch bridge in Crimea was partially destroyed by an explosion Saturday morning, in a strategic and symbolic blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his campaign against Ukraine.

    The damage to the bridge, which comes as Ukrainian advances continue to reclaim occupied territories from Moscow’s forces, endangers a crucial route for Russian military supplies to support its forces in southern Ukraine.

    Two spans of the road portion of the bridge collapsed as a result of “an accident,” according to Sergei Aksyonov, the Russia-installed head of the Crimea administration. “Fuel tanks have also caught fire,” Aksyonov said in a post on social media. 

    Russia’s National Anti-Terrorist Committee said that a truck was blown up on the bridge, according to Russian media. As a result of the blast, “a partial collapse” of two spans occurred, it said. Russia’s Investigative Committee said three people were killed in the explosion, according to media reports.

    According to videos and photos posted Saturday morning by eyewitnesses, several fuel tankers were on fire on the rail part of the bridge, while at least one road span had partially collapsed into the waters of the Kerch Strait, which connects the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. 

    “As soon as the fire is extinguished, it will be possible to assess damage to the bridge and pillars, and it will be possible to talk about the timing of the restoration of traffic,” Aksyonov said. 

    The head of the Russian-installed regional parliament in Crimea, Vladimir Konstantinov, blamed the damage to the bridge on “Ukrainian vandals,” according to Russian media.

    Kyiv hasn’t claim responsibility for the damage to the bridge, but Ukrainian officials celebrated the blast on social media. Referring to a flagship Russian vessel sunk by Kyiv earlier this year, Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense tweeted: “The guided missile cruiser Moskva and the Kerch Bridge – two notorious symbols of Russian power in Ukrainian Crimea – have gone down. What’s next in line, russkies?”

    The Kerch bridge, which connects Crimea with the Russian mainland, was opened personally by Putin with much fanfare in 2018, after Moscow seized the peninsula from Ukraine in 2014. The construction of the bridge was slammed by both Kyiv and its Western backers as illegal at the time. 

    Since the start of the Kremlin’s war on Ukraine in late February, the bridge has been crucially important for the transfer of manpower, weapons and fuel to Russian units fighting Ukrainian troops in southern Ukraine. 

    Putin on Saturday ordered a government commission to investigate “the emergency on the Crimean bridge” and officials have been dispatched to the scene, Russian media reported, citing Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

    According to Aksyonov, ferry service will start operating on Saturday in place of the damaged bridge.

    Over the past months, Ukrainian officials have repeatedly declared Kyiv’s plans to target the Crimea bridge. In April, Oleksiy Danilov, secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, said in a radio interview that the bridge will “definitely” be hit, if Kyiv gets an opportunity. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov branded Danilov’s statement as “announcing a possible terrorist attack.” 

    After the partial collapse of the Kerch bridge Saturday morning, Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s office, said in a tweet that “everything illegal must be destroyed, everything stolen must be returned to Ukraine, everything occupied by Russia must be expelled.”

    Zelenskyy, in an address Friday night, said Ukraine has taken back more than 2,400 square kilometers of its territory occupied by Russia. “This week alone, our soldiers liberated 776 square kilometers of territory in the east of our country and 29 settlements,” Zelenskyy said.

    [ad_2]

    Sergei Kuznetsov

    Source link

  • Iran’s ‘women’s revolution’ could be a Berlin Wall moment | CNN Politics

    Iran’s ‘women’s revolution’ could be a Berlin Wall moment | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    The Islamic regime in Iran has ruled for decades with fear and intimidation.

    Outrage at the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22 year-old who died after being detained by Iran’s morality policy, allegedly for improperly wearing her hijab, ignited nationwide protests across the country that have gone on for weeks.

    That Iranians are risking their lives and freedom to stand up to their government has sparked hope among many that change is coming. Read CNN’s latest report.

    I talked on the phone to Masih Alinejad, an Iranian in exile in the US who works as a journalist and activist.

    Key points:

    • She uses social media – 8 million followers on Instagram alone – to amplify and aid the protests inside Iran.
    • US authorities charged four Iranian nationals with trying to kidnap her last year.
    • To Alinejad, that women in Iran are removing their headscarves as an act of protest is equal to the fall of the Berlin Wall.
    • She sees solidarity with dissidents from other oil-rich autocracies like Russia and Venezuela, and has a stern message for feminists in the West.

    Our conversation, edited for clarity and length, is below. I’ve also added some context and links in parentheses where appropriate.

    WHAT MATTERS: This newsletter is not usually focused on Iran. Can you first just explain what’s happening?

    ALINEJAD: Mahsa Amini was only 22 years old. … She came from Saqqez to Tehran for a vacation. Then she got arrested by the so-called morality police – because I call them the hijab police.

    And for your audience, if they don’t know what morality police means, they’re a bunch of police walking in the streets, telling people whether their way of wearing hijab is proper or not.

    Mahsa was arrested for wearing inappropriate hijab. So she was not unveiled.

    (Here is a CNN report in which the Iranian police deny the allegation she was beaten.)

    ALINEJAD: That created huge anger among Iranians. And that is why women across Iran first started to cut their hair. Then they took to the street and they started to burn their headscarves. And now, with men, shoulder to shoulder, across Iran they’re not only saying no to compulsory hijab, they are actually chanting against the dictator and they are saying we want an end to the Islamic Republic.

    This is a revolution.

    To me, this is a women’s revolution against a gender apartheid regime.

    WHAT MATTERS: The Iranian government has tried to crack down on this. We see video that gets out of Iran of these protests. How have things changed in the weeks since Mahsa’s death?

    ALINEJAD: From the beginning, the level of crackdown was so brutal. They opened fire, they really opened fire on teenagers, school leaders, university students, they opened fire on unarmed people.

    Now some reports say more than 130 people have been killed. But it’s strongly believed the number is much more than this. Only in Zahedan on only one day, they opened fire on those who were praying. Who were praying. They killed more than 80 people in Zahedan.

    (CNN has not verified all of these claims. Related CNN report: Iranian security forces beat, shot and detained students of elite Tehran university, witnesses say.

    Amnesty International has reported on the killing of 66 in Zahedan along with other deaths recorded in other places.

    Regarding death tolls: CNN cannot independently verify the death toll –  a precise figure is impossible for anyone outside the Iranian government to confirm – and different estimates have been given by opposition groups, international rights organizations and local journalists.)

    ALINEJAD: The Iranian regime cut off the internet in some cities to prevent the rest of the world from getting to know about the crackdown, to get to learn about the number of people killed.

    But again. That didn’t stop people. Actually, it changed the tone of the protesters. They became more angry. They were holding the names and photos of those who got killed and the major slogan was this: ‘We are ready to die, but we won’t live under humiliation.’

    One of the young women whose name was Hadis Najafi, she was only 20 years old. She made a video of herself walking in the street and saying I’m joining the protests. In the future, if I see that Iran has changed, that change came, then I was proudly part of this demonstration. She got killed. There are many of them.

    (CNN has reported that Najafi’s family said she was shot six times and never made it home from a protest. She was 23. There are reports of multiple young women killed. Here’s a CNN video report on Nika Shahkarami, whose family found her body at a morgue after not being able to find her for 10 days following an Instagram story of her burning her headscarf.)

    Students filmed themselves burning their headscarves, but they got killed. But murdering and killing didn’t stop the protests. Instead they became more angry. Now schoolgirls came out, university professors came out, teachers came out and ask for a strike.

    (Here’s a CNN report that explains the special significance of strikes in Iran.)

    WHAT MATTERS: The flashpoint is one woman’s death that set off all of these protests. But it’s a movement that’s been building for months –

    ALINEJAD: Don’t say for months. I don’t accept that. It has been building for years. Years of women pushing back the boundaries the anti-woman laws, especially compulsory hijab laws.

    For years and years, these women that you see in the streets, they have been fighting back compulsory hijabs alone. Like lonely soldiers. I myself have published videos of women being beaten by morality police under the hashtag #mycameraismyweapon. I really want you to go and check this hashtag. Brave women filming themselves while being harassed by morality police and looking to the morality police and saying that you cannot tell me what to wear.

    Slavery used to be legal. I’m not going to respect bad law in Iran.

    This is being built up by women within the society practicing their civil disobedience in bravely saying no to forced hijab and the gender apartheid regime for years and years. That’s my opinion. Mahsa’s name became a symbol of resistance for women to take to the streets in large numbers. That’s the new thing.

    WHAT MATTERS: How will this be transformed into permanent change? How will it evolve from here?

    ALINEJAD: Look, this is not going to happen overnight. This is the beginning of an end. It takes time. It reminds me of the revolution 40 years ago. People were taking to the streets for like one month and were going back home and then coming back again. The national strike helped a lot. For me and millions of people, this is just the beginning to an end.

    The compulsory hijab is not just a small piece of cloth for Iranians. It’s like the Berlin Wall. I keep saying that. If women can successfully tear this wall down, the Islamic Republic won’t exist.

    Maybe in the West, people ignore me and they never take this seriously. But the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, he knows what I’m talking about. That’s why, just two days ago, he referred to my statement comparing the hijab to the Berlin Wall, saying that ‘she is an American agent and we have taken action against her.’

    (Alinejad shared this video of Khamenei on Twitter, in which he refers to US political elements making the comparison to the Berlin Wall.)

    ALINEJAD: But it’s not me. It’s millions of people who believe that compulsory hijab is like the main pillar of the religious dictatorship. It’s like the main pillar of the Islamic Republic.

    That’s why I believe that now people are being fearless and clear that we want to break this weakest pillar of the Islamic Republic… I strongly believe that the biggest threat to the Islamic Republic are the women who are leading the revolution, who are facing guns and bullets and saying that we want an end for this gender apartheid regime.

    WHAT MATTERS: In Iran, and we’ve seen this in Russia as well, social media is helping spread the word and is essential to organizing protests. Here in the US, it is often viewed as a threat to our democracy because that’s where misinformation is spread. I wonder if you had any thoughts on that dichotomy.

    ALINEJAD: Let me be very clear with you. Right now, the tech companies are actually helping the Islamic Republic. First of all, Iranians are banned from using social media – Instagram, Facebook and Twitter are filtered. The leaders like Khamenei and other officials who ban 80 million people from using social media, they all have verified accounts. They have multiple accounts on social media. Basically, the Iranian regime cut off the Internet for its own people, but they’re being more than welcomed on social media to spread fake information, misinformation, disinformation.

    (Accounts that appear to be associated with Khamenei are on Twitter and Instagram and have large followings. They are not verified by Instagram or Twitter. Twitter did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for Meta said this in an email: “Iranians use apps like Instagram to stay close to their loved ones, find information and shed light on important events – and we hope the Iranian authorities restore their access soon. In the meantime, our teams are following the situation closely, and are focused on only removing content that breaks our rules, while addressing any enforcement mistakes as quickly as possible.”)

    WHAT MATTERS: The US government has tried to increase Iranian’s access to the internet. Is that working?

    ALINEJAD: Oh, of course, this is phenomenal. But we need more. We need more.

    The thing is, at the same time, the US government, we’re pleased that they’re providing internet access for Iranians. This is good. We appreciate that.

    But at the same time, the US government is focused on getting a deal from this regime, the same regime.

    They condemn the brutality, they condemn the Iranian government for killings, but at the same time, they try to give money, billions of dollars, to the same murderers. And I don’t understand this contradiction.

    (The US government could give Iran’s government ​access to billions of dollars of frozen Iranian funds if it re-joins an agreement whereby Iran can sell oil in exchange for abandoning nuclear weapons capability. Recent talks, however, have not gone well. Read more.)

    ALINEJAD: Many people in the streets are now risking their lives and want an end for the same regime. They aren’t asking for US government to go there and save them at all. They’re brave enough to do it themselves. But they’re really clearly asking the US government not to save the Iranian regime. …

    People believe that the money goes to the benefit of the people. It doesn’t go to the people. The money goes to Syria, Lebanon, to Hamas, Hezbollah, to terrorist organizations.

    For millions of Iranians now, this is the moment they want the US government to ask its allies, the European countries, to recall their ambassadors and to cut their ties with the murders until the day that they are sure that the Iranian regime is stopped killing its own people.

    (CNN isn’t able to confirm that all the money goes to terrorist organizations or that none of it goes to Iranian people. Iran does fund terror groups outside its borders, according to the US government, and its own Islamic Revolutionary Guard is a terror group, according to the US government.)

    WHAT MATTERS: I want to talk about another dichotomy you’ve pointed out. You wrote in The Washington Post that feminists all over the world need to pay attention and take to the streets.

    ALINEJAD: You cannot call yourself a feminist in the West, in America, and not take action on one of the most important feminist revolutions, in Iran.

    By saying that, I don’t mean that I want the feminists to just appear on TV and cut their hair to show their solidarity.

    I want, especially the female politicians, to cut their ties … and instead take to the streets to show their solidarity with the women of Iran. When the Women’s March happened here in America, like every single feminist around the world showed solidarity. I was part of the Women’s March in New York. The main slogan was ‘my body my choice.’

    But at the same time I’m witnessing that when it comes to Iran and Afghanistan, it seems that my body my choice is not as important as it is in the West.

    (Here Alinejad said women representing Western governments who meet with Iranian and Afghan officials should refrain from wearing headscarves.)

    WHAT MATTERS: You took part this week in an Oslo Freedom Forum event in New York with other dissidents from Russia and Venezuela. Those are two places that are repressive, and they’re also funded largely by oil. The US wants more oil on the market. I just wondered if you had any larger comments to make on this question?

    ALINEJAD: This is what’s missing here. The dictators are more united than our freedom fighters.

    Let me give you an example. Just two months ago, (Vladimir) Putin went to Iran. (Nicolás) Maduro from Venezuela went to Iran … from China to Russia to Venezuela to Nicaragua, everywhere. The leaders from autocracies and dictatorships are united. They’re helping each other. They’re supporting each other to oppress protests taking place in each country. But we the freedom fighters, we the opposition to these dictators must be united as well, because when we fight against autocracy or dictatorship on our own, we’re not going to be successful.

    (Alinejad said she has talked to dissidents from Russia and Venezuela about calling a World Liberty Congress for opposition and activist leaders.)

    ALINEJAD: If we don’t get united to end dictatorship, then the dictators will get united to end democracy. We’re not fighting just for ourselves. I’m not fighting just for Iran. Garry Kasparov is not fighting for just Russia. Leopoldo Lopez is not fighting just for Venezuela. We are fighting for democracy. We’re trying to protect the rest of the world from these dictators.

    (Our conversation continued from here and Alinejad argued the “United Nations is useless.” It’s true the United Nations prioritizes inclusion of most countries over action. And it is awkward at best that Iran sits on the UN’s Commission on Women’s Rights and Russia sits on the Security Council.)

    ALINEJAD: We need to have our own alternative United Nations, where all the good people get united, not the bad guys. Now the bad guys are winning because they’re helping each other. So this is the time that all the good people who care for freedom and democracy get united and have their own society.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Climate change does not cause hurricanes, but it is very likely climate change caused Hurricane Ian to be more destructive

    Climate change does not cause hurricanes, but it is very likely climate change caused Hurricane Ian to be more destructive

    [ad_1]

    While towns across Florida and the Carolinas are cleaning up in the aftermath of Hurricane Ian and the death toll climbs, several high-profile climate change skeptics are questioning the connection between the hurricane and human-caused climate change.

    “Blaming any one individual hurricane on man-made climate change is just the absolute height of absurdity,” tweeted conservative pundit Matt Walsh, in a post that was shared over 20,000 times. In another tweet posted on October 3rd, climate skeptic Peter Clack (whose claim has been the subject of a previous fact check) says, “A hurricane is not climate change. Nor is rainfall, storms or winter snow. They are all just the the weather. This concept of weather has been hijacked by a global warming frenzy, that has been relentless for 33 years. We must see a return to common sense.”

    Scientists concede that any direct links between climate change and one weather event are difficult to prove. However, the consensus is that these extreme weather events are being exacerbated by climate change, making them more intense. Therefore, this claim is rated “half true.”

    “It is true that climate change does not cause hurricanes,” says Andrew Dessler, director of Texas Center for Climate Studies and professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M, “However, we can say with very high confidence that the hurricane was more destructive due to climate change.”  

    Hurricane Ian dumped an enormous amount of rain on parts of Florida. Radar estimates and ground observation rainfall shows well-over one foot of rain fell in just 12-24 hours across a swath of the region. In some of the hardest-hit areas such as Placida and Lake Wales, this exceeds the rainfall rates for 1-in-1,000 year flood events, according to NOAA data. 

    “We are 100% sure that the storm surge was more damaging because it was riding on a higher sea level,” adds Dessler, “We are very confident that global warming is also causing more rainfall from hurricanes because warmer air holds more water. Finally, we have some confidence that climate change is increasing the intensity of hurricanes, so this hurricane may have had stronger winds than it would otherwise have had.” 

    “You need to look at trends,” warns Kim Prather, Distinguished Chair in Atmospheric Chemistry at University of California, San Diego. “And there is definitely an increase in the number of major weather related disasters occurring over recent decades.”

    [ad_2]

    Newswise

    Source link

  • Climate change does not cause hurricanes, but it is very likely climate change caused Hurricane Ian to be more destructive

    Climate change does not cause hurricanes, but it is very likely climate change caused Hurricane Ian to be more destructive

    [ad_1]

    While towns across Florida and the Carolinas are cleaning up in the aftermath of Hurricane Ian and the death toll climbs, several high-profile climate change skeptics are questioning the connection between the hurricane and human-caused climate change.

    “Blaming any one individual hurricane on man-made climate change is just the absolute height of absurdity,” tweeted conservative pundit Matt Walsh, in a post that was shared over 20,000 times. In another tweet posted on October 3rd, climate skeptic Peter Clack (whose claim has been the subject of a previous fact check) says, “A hurricane is not climate change. Nor is rainfall, storms or winter snow. They are all just the the weather. This concept of weather has been hijacked by a global warming frenzy, that has been relentless for 33 years. We must see a return to common sense.”

    Scientists concede that any direct links between climate change and one weather event are difficult to prove. However, the consensus is that these extreme weather events are being exacerbated by climate change, making them more intense. Therefore, this claim is rated “half true.”

    “It is true that climate change does not cause hurricanes,” says Andrew Dessler, director of Texas Center for Climate Studies and professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M, “However, we can say with very high confidence that the hurricane was more destructive due to climate change.”  

    Hurricane Ian dumped an enormous amount of rain on parts of Florida. Radar estimates and ground observation rainfall shows well-over one foot of rain fell in just 12-24 hours across a swath of the region. In some of the hardest-hit areas such as Placida and Lake Wales, this exceeds the rainfall rates for 1-in-1,000 year flood events, according to NOAA data. 

    “We are 100% sure that the storm surge was more damaging because it was riding on a higher sea level,” adds Dessler, “We are very confident that global warming is also causing more rainfall from hurricanes because warmer air holds more water. Finally, we have some confidence that climate change is increasing the intensity of hurricanes, so this hurricane may have had stronger winds than it would otherwise have had.” 

    “You need to look at trends,” warns Kim Prather, Distinguished Chair in Atmospheric Chemistry at University of California, San Diego. “And there is definitely an increase in the number of major weather related disasters occurring over recent decades.”

    [ad_2]

    Newswise

    Source link

  • 5 Unspoken Rules You Need to Know to Start a Media Agency

    5 Unspoken Rules You Need to Know to Start a Media Agency

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    It’s no secret that the ad market is booming. Global ad spending is forecasted to increase by $58 billion in 2022, rising to $781 billion from $723 billion in 2021, and businesses of all kinds are vying for attention in the online marketplace.

    But what about aspects of the industry that are secret? For instance, what are the unspoken rules that your fledgling agency needs to be aware of when you are starting out?

    Related: How This Agency Is Using Creativity to Inspire Greatness in Others

    1. Think small

    How many times have you been told to “think big,” “dream big,” or “look at the bigger picture?” In the case of a media agency, it may be better to go against this advice and, instead, to think small.

    By “thinking small” we mean identifying a corner of the market you can really make the most of. Consider your own background. Which industries do you have direct experience in? Which marketing techniques have you mastered — is it traditional media, pay-per-click or SEO? What do your previous clients, colleagues or employers believe to be your greatest strengths?

    Put yourself in your customers’ shoes. Which do you think they prefer: a jack-of-all-trades agency that claims to do it all, or an honest and upfront operation geared towards specific fields and goals? In today’s highly competitive, highly granular landscape, it’s likely to be the latter time and time again.

    From my own experience, my first agency was singularly focused on traditional media at the outset, and then grew to add digital and social capabilities. After developing a solid client base, our agency found that the best way to expand was to develop a strong relationship with our clients first, and then provide more services related to their needs.

    Related: 10 Secrets to Building a Successful Digital Marketing Agency

    2. Demonstrate your capability

    The best advertisement for your business is your business itself, especially in the digital space. Basically, you need to lead by example, demonstrating exactly what you can do and why you are the best option for your clients.

    Don’t just tell your prospects what you can do for them — show them. Agencies who can talk the talk but can’t walk the walk will struggle to gain traction in the market.

    I have found client testimonials and case studies on our agency’s best work to be great selling tools when converting prospects into fully-fledged clients. Of course, these testimonials need to come from somewhere — in my early days, I offered free trials with the agreement to publish testimonials and studies, giving me a solid basis that I could use to hook new clients. This method of “showing” rather than “telling” is our highest source of conversion, and it also showcases our expertise beautifully.

    3. Be selective, at least at the beginning

    By thinking small, you are developing a real area of expertise — a market niche you can corner and make your own. Unfortunately, this means your fledgling media agency is not going to be for everyone. You’re not going to please all of your prospective clients, and you’re going to stretch yourself too thinly if you try to do so.

    So, be selective. At the beginning of your agency’s development journey, find the clients who represent the best fit for your organization and for your skill set. I’ve personally found that targeting small- to medium-sized bricks and mortar retail businesses were highly effective. This is due to their always-on marketing approach, and their consistent promotional efforts and budgets.

    Don’t be afraid to say no to clients who you feel you might not be able to assist properly or to avoid clients with goals you’re not sure you can achieve. By overstretching, you are only going to garner negative reviews that will harm your business. It’s also crucial to check the credit history of the prospective client — I learned early on that a good client is one who spends regularly and pays their bills on time.

    Of course, this is easier said than done. It’s exciting when you discover a new prospect, especially a warm lead, and you may feel reluctant to pass up on this business. Just remember that growth needs to be steady and sustainable. You don’t want to be hiring staff for a specific project, only to find you don’t need these staff later on.

    Related: The 7 Steps to Managing Your Ad Agency

    4. Identify specific hiring needs with a focus on business identity

    In order to grow your business, you need to hire. However, as we’ve already touched on, you need to hire sustainably. Start by handling as much as you can with your current in-house team, or just by yourself. Once you begin to understand your capabilities, you can identify where you need specific help and assistance.

    Your company culture always needs to come first. Foster a strong business identity within the nucleus of your team, and then make sure all hires are ready and willing to engage with this. Your culture needs to resonate with your prospects, which means it needs to resonate with your personnel too.

    The Covid-19 pandemic hit recruitment hard, and it has been extremely difficult to find and retain skilled staff. With this in mind, don’t be afraid to hire remote-based staff, but remember to actively manage these hires rather than leaving them to their own devices.

    5. Be good at new business

    It doesn’t matter whether you’re starting a digital agency or a more traditional agency — finding new business opportunities and converting these is going to be crucial. Some agency owners may bemoan their “bad luck” when it comes to finding the leads and prospects they need to grow. While luck may play a part, I’ve always found that the harder you work, the more fortunate you become.

    Target improvements in your acquisitions process. One way to do this is to create excellent relationships with your existing clients so that these clients act as a beacon for future prospects. However, you will still have to reach out and find these prospects in the market, so hone your direct, outbound marketing skills as you grow your agency.

    Related: How to Start a Successful Marketing Agency from Scratch

    Become the go-to in your field

    Getting your agency off the ground can be tricky. However, by narrowing your parameters to focus on your strengths, being selective as you build your client roster, maintaining a strong business culture and by supporting both existing and prospective clients, you can begin to build a strong presence in the market. Becoming the go-to agency in your niche is the key to success as you build your presence in the market. This is your aim.

    [ad_2]

    Matthew Nunn

    Source link

  • To buy Twitter, Musk has to keep banks, investors on board

    To buy Twitter, Musk has to keep banks, investors on board

    [ad_1]

    If the squabbling ever stops over Elon Musk’s renewed bid to buy Twitter, experts say he still faces a huge obstacle to closing the $44 billion deal: Keeping his financing in place.

    Earlier this week, Musk reversed course and said he’d go through with acquiring the social media company under the same terms he agreed to in April. But after months of tweetstorms and legal barbs, there are scars and suspicions on both sides.

    Experts say that behind the scenes, banks could be scrambling to find buyers for $12.5 billion in debt from the deal, and Musk is trying to hold together a group of equity investors that is pitching in billions more. The erratic billionaire is on the hook for the rest.

    The fighting continued Thursday, when Musk’s attorneys said Twitter is refusing to accept his revived bid to buy the company. They sought to delay an upcoming trial on Twitter’s lawsuit that could force him to complete the deal.

    But Twitter’s attorneys said it’s Musk who is holding everything up, and his effort to put the trial on hold “is an invitation to further mischief and delay.”

    In the end, a judge agreed to give Musk more time to close the deal but said the trial will go ahead in November if he doesn’t.

    It’s still possible the sale could close. But with so much at play, here’s what could throw the deal off track, again:

    BANK FINANCING

    A group of banks, including Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, signed on to loan $12.5 billion of the money Musk needs for the deal. In Thursday’s court motion, Musk alleges that Twitter doesn’t want to set the lawsuit aside because of a “baseless” fear that Musk could fail to get the bank financing.

    “No such failure has occurred to date,” the motion said. “Counsel for the debt financing parties has advised that each of their clients is prepared to honor its obligations.”

    The banks are “essentially cemented” to the deal by solid contracts, Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said. But the debt market has changed dramatically since April. The stock market has tumbled, inflation is high, and interest rates are up as the Federal Reserve tries to slow the economy.

    Banks would sell the debt to institutional investors, but there’s not much appetite now to take part in takeovers that saddle companies with big debts. Banks could be on the hook to make loans themselves.

    “The banks would be really happy to not to have to take the risk of funding these loans,” said Erik Gordon, a law and business professor at the University of Michigan. “The agreements seem to be very strong, but I think the banks have their lawyers pulling all-nighters trying to get them out of it if they can.”

    EQUITY INVESTORS

    Investors who would get equity in Twitter are supposed to kick in billions. Ives estimates they had agreed to $15 billion to $16 billion. But some investors may be skittish about staying in given the market changes and Musk’s repeated accusations against Twitter about the number of bots on the platform.

    Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund declined comment this week on the $375 million its subsidiary pledged in May. Several other investors didn’t respond to requests for comment on whether they were still chipping in.

    Musk’s equity commitments — including $1 billion from Musk’s friend and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison — are on shakier ground if any in that diverse group of backers have changed their minds, said Kevin Kaiser, an adjunct finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.

    “Nobody knows — I don’t know anyway — what their commitment is,” Kaiser said. “So are they able to back out? Because if they’re able to back out, he is on the hook.”

    MUSK MONEY

    Musk, the world’s richest person with a net worth of $231 billion according to Forbes, has to kick in his own money, but just how much depends on how many equity investors stay in.

    Most of his wealth is tied up in stock of the electric car company that he runs, Tesla Inc. Since April, he has sold more than $15 billion worth of Tesla stock, presumably to pay his share.

    If any equity investors drop out, though, Musk will either have to replace them or throw in more money, fueling speculation that he might have to sell more Tesla shares. Musk’s share of the original deal was about $15.5 billion, Ives estimated.

    THE GUARANTEE

    It’s clear that Twitter’s board is very suspect of Musk because he has trashed the company for months now, alleging that it has far fewer daily users than it reports to investors, said Gordon.

    That has diminished Twitter’s value and made investing in the deal less attractive, he says. And because Musk already tried to back out of the deal once, Twitter will want a guarantee of some sort that he won’t back out again.

    That, Ives said, is likely to be a large chunk of money held in a non-refundable escrow account that would go to Twitter if Musk doesn’t deliver.

    SIGNS OF PROGRESS

    There are some signs that the deal will yet go through. Twitter says it looks forward to closing the deal by Oct. 28. Musk’s deposition in the lawsuit, scheduled for Thursday in Austin, Texas, was postponed. Musk’s motion says the bankers are still in. And the original group of investors is not talking publicly about bailing out.

    ———

    Krisher reported from Detroit, O’Brien from Providence, Rhode Island.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter under Musk? Most of the plans are a mystery

    Twitter under Musk? Most of the plans are a mystery

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A super app called X? A bot-free free speech haven? These are some of Elon Musk’s mysterious plans for Twitter, now that he may be buying the company after all.

    After months of squabbling over the fate of their bombshell $44 billion deal, the billionaire and the bird app are essentially back to square one — if a bit worse for wear as trust and goodwill has seemed to erode on both sides.

    Musk, the CEO of Tesla Motors and SpaceX and Twitter’s most high-profile user since former President Donald Trump was booted from it, has shared few concrete details about his plans for the social media platform. While he’s touted free speech and derided spam bots since agreeing to buy the company in April, what he actually wants to do about either is shrouded in mystery.

    He could own one of the world’s most powerful communications platforms with 237 million daily users in a matter of weeks, though the deal is not final. The lack of clear plans for the platform are raising concern among Twitter’s constituencies, ranging from users in conflict regions where it offers an information lifeline to the company’s own employees.

    “Both users and advertisers are — understandably — anxious about whether the move will fundamentally change the culture of the platform,” said Brooke Erin Duffy, a professor at Cornell University who studies social media. “And so, Musk will need to decide whether he wants to quash their concerns by retaining core features (the content moderation system, for instance) and keeping the company public — or whether he will undertake a full-scale overhaul.”

    Muddling things further, on Tuesday Musk tweeted that “Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app,” without further explanation.

    Although Musk’s tweets and statements have been cryptic, technology analysts have speculated that Musk wants to re-create a version of China’s WeChat app that can do video chats, messaging, streaming, scan bar codes and make payments.

    He gave a little more detail during Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting in August, telling the crowd at a factory near Austin, Texas, that he uses Twitter frequently and knows the product well. “I think I’ve got a good sense of where to point the engineering team with Twitter to make it radically better,” he said.

    Handling payments for goods could be a key part of the app. Musk said he has a “grander vision” for what X.com, an online bank he started early in his career that eventually became part of PayPal, could have been.

    “Obviously that could be started from scratch, but I think Twitter would help accelerate that by three-to-five years,” Musk said at the August meeting. “So it’s kind of something that I thought would be quite useful for a long time. I know what to do.”

    For now, Twitter has immediate and pressing problems Musk will need to deal with if he takes ownership of the company. Its social media rivals are struggling with declining stock prices and some, like Snap, even announced layoffs. Government regulation and attracting younger users away from TikTok are also challenges. And Musk’s vision of a free speech haven has social media and content moderation experts, as well as digital and human rights advocates, concerned.

    “When this all started in the spring, we had indicators and a strong sense of what Musk might do with the platform,” said Angelo Carusone of Media Matters, a watchdog group that opposes the takeover. “Because of the lawsuit, we know who he’s been talking to, what he’s been saying and the types of far-right ideological decision makers he wants to put in place. To put it bluntly, the worst fears have been confirmed.”

    Twitter employees, under former CEO Jack Dorsey and his predecessors, have spent years working to tame the platform once called the “free-speech wing of the free-speech party” where hate and harassment abound into something where all are welcome and safe. While it’s far from perfect, critics worry Musk’s ownership will mean turning back the clock on years of this work.

    “Musk made it clear that he would roll back Twitter’s community standards and safety guidelines, reinstate Donald Trump along with scores of other accounts suspended for violence and abuse, and open the floodgates of disinformation,” Carusone said.

    The company, for instance, was an early adopter of the “report abuse” button in 2013, after U.K. member of parliament Stella Creasy received a barrage of rape and death threats on the platform, echoing the experiences of other women over the years.

    In subsequent years, Twitter continued to craft rules and invest in staff and technology to detect violent threats, harassment and misinformation that violates its policies. After evidence emerged that Russia used their platforms to try to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, social media companies also stepped up their efforts against political misinformation.

    The big question now is how far Musk, who describes himself as a “free-speech absolutist,” wants to ratchet back these systems — and whether users and advertisers will stick around if he does.

    Aiming to tamp down such worries, Musk said in May he wants Twitter to be “as broadly inclusive as possible ” where ideally, most of America is on it and talking — a far cry from the far-right playground his critics are warning against.

    And while Musk has hinted he’d consider reinstating Trump’s account, it’s not clear the former president, who has since launched his own social media platform, would return.

    Then there’s the matter of Twitter’s employees, who’ve been living with uncertainty, high- (and low-) profile departures and a potential owner who’s publicly derided them on their own platform. Musk has also targeted Twitter’s work-from home policy, having once called for the company’s headquarters to be turned into a “homeless shelter” because, he said, so few employees actually worked there.

    As a hyper-frequent Twitter user with over 100 million followers, Musk does know how to use the platform. During an all-hands staff meeting Musk attended in June, he said his goal was to make it “so compelling that you can’t live without it.” If he’s able to realize this, it could finally put Twitter in the big leagues of social media, with TikTok and Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, where users are counted in the billions, not mere millions.

    Of course, Musk is also well known for predictions that are delayed or may not come true, such as colonizing Mars or deploying a fleet of autonomous robotaxis.

    “This is not a car manufacturer where, good enough, all you have to do is beat General Motors. Sorry, that isn’t really that hard,” said David Kirsch, a professor of strategy and entrepreneurship at the University of Maryland who’s studied Twitter bots’ effect on Tesla’s stock price. “You are dealing here with all of these other companies (that) also have very sophisticated AI programs, very sophisticated PhD programmers…everyone is trying to crack this nut.”

    —

    Krisher reported from Detroit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • EXPLAINER: Musk Twitter turnaround reflects legal challenges

    EXPLAINER: Musk Twitter turnaround reflects legal challenges

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Elon Musk’s sudden about face on a $44 billion agreement to acquire Twitter, reversing an earlier attempt to rescind that offer, came as a surprise even from the mercurial billionaire who loves to shock.

    It sent shares of the social media platform soaring Tuesday and stoked alarm among some media watchdogs and civil rights groups about what kind of free speech will flourish on Twitter under Musk.

    Yet the legal challenges faced by Musk in the three months since he announced that he intended to back out of the deal continued to mount, increasingly closing off avenues of escape for the Tesla CEO.

    Gambles, missteps, and potential reprieves that failed to pan out, weakened an already dicey case for withdrawal. And then there is the potentially embarrassing deposition scheduled for Thursday and what most considered a long-shot chance for reprieve before a Chancery Court in Delaware in less than two weeks.

    Musk said he’ll only agree to continue willingly with the acquisition if that trial is put on hold.

    Here’s a look at how the legal battle unfolded:

    What was Musk’s main argument for backing out of buying Twitter?

    Musk grounded his argument largely on the allegation that Twitter vastly misrepresented how it measures the magnitude of “spam bot” accounts, a discrepancy that could diminish the money advertisers are willing to pay to appear on the platform.

    But he faced a difficult challenge in making that case to Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the court’s head judge. The judge was widely expected to focus narrowly in line with the court’s mandate: on the merger agreement between Musk and Twitter, and whether anything had changed since it was signed in April that would justify terminating the deal. She also made clear she wanted to proceed with the case swiftly, and several times denied Musk’s attempts to delay it and keep bringing in new evidence.

    A former Twitter head of security, fired early this year and turned whistleblower, appeared to bolster Musk’s argument. Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, a respected cybersecurity expert, filed complaints in July with federal regulators and the Justice Department alleging that Twitter misled regulators about its efforts to control millions of spam accounts as well as its cyber defenses.

    Yet any hope that Musk’s case would be bolstered by Zatko’s disclosures was a “longshot,” said Brian Quinn, a professor at Boston College Law School, and in the end, “it didn’t really change the (legal) landscape in any significant way.”

    Did Musk’s approach to buying Twitter hurt or help his case?

    “He was fairly cavalier,” Quinn said. Recently released text messages between Musk and others appear jubilant over Musk’s large stake in Twitter and the potential for taking a board seat. It wasn’t until after Musk signed the merger agreement in late April that he undertook what’s called due diligence, or a close inspection, of the company’s health. It is only then that he started lodging complaints about bots, Quinn said. That may not have impressed the judge as the right approach for someone buying a major company.

    Why did Musk change his mind now?

    In addition to the trial and Thursday deposition, the cost of borrowing money is ticking steadily higher as the Federal Reserve and central banks worldwide attempt to constrain soaring inflation. If Musk lost at trial, the judge could not only force him to close the deal but also impose interest payments that would make Twitter even more expensive for Musk than the current $44 billion price tag. Experts say the interest costs likely started piling up mid-September.

    But of course the deal isn’t done yet, and there are legal hoops yet to be jumped through. Given Musk’s track record and volatility, it would be a mistake to assume that it’s tied up in a bow.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Twitter-Musk trial is now on pause | CNN Business

    The Twitter-Musk trial is now on pause | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    The judge overseeing the acquisition dispute between Elon Musk and Twitter on Thursday ruled to pause the legal proceedings until Oct. 28 following a request from the Tesla CEO, meaning the trial that was set to begin Oct. 17 will not go ahead as planned.

    Twitter had opposed Musk’s motion to stay the proceedings and raised concerns that he might not follow through on his word to quickly close the deal.

    “If the transaction does not close by 5 p.m. on October 28, 2022, the parties are instructed to contact me by email that evening to obtain November 2022 trial dates,” the judge, Delaware Chancery Court chancellor Kathaleen St. Judge McCormick, said in the order.

    Lawyers for Elon Musk on Thursday filed a motion to stay the legal proceedings in its dispute with Twitter and to remove from the court’s calendar the trial that had been set to begin Oct. 17, noting “changed circumstances that have effectively mooted this action,” according to a Thursday court filing.

    The filing — which says the stay is “pending the closing of the transaction” — comes after Musk earlier this week proposed proceeding with the $44 billion acquisition of Twitter at the originally agreed upon terms after having spent months trying to get out of the deal.

    The filing states that Musk is “willing to close the transaction at $54.20, the Debt Financing parties are working cooperatively to fund the close, and closing is expected on or around October 28.”

    But the filing also alludes to resistance from Twitter to halt the legal proceedings. “Twitter will not take yes for an answer. Astonishingly, they have insisted on proceeding with this litigation,” according to the letter.

    Lawyers for Twitter issued a sharp response to Musk’s filing. “The obstacle to terminating this litigation is not, as Defendants say, that Twitter is unwilling to take yes for an answer,” the letter states. “The obstacle is that Defendants still refuse to accept their contractual obligations.”

    It notes that for months, Musk has been attempting to exit the deal and “now, on the eve of trial, Defendants declare they intend to close after all. ‘Trust us,’ they say, ‘we mean it this time.’”

    “Until Defendants commit to close as required, Twitter is entitled to its day in Court,” Twitter’s letter states. “Defendants can and should close next week. Until they do, this action is not moot and should be brought to trial.”

    The back-and-forth offers the clearest indication yet that Musk’s financing may now be the central issue in the dispute between the Tesla CEO and Twitter over halting the legal proceedings and completing the deal. Musk has previously said he would pay for the acquisition through a mix of debt commitments from financial institutions, equity financing from investors and his own assets.

    But legal experts have raised concerns that debt financiers may now want to pull out of the deal in light of recent changes to the debt market and declines in value of social media companies. Twitter, according to experts, would likely want to maintain the litigation as pressure on Musk unless he agrees to close the deal with or without the debt financing.

    In the Thursday filing, Musk’s legal team stated that Twitter has resisted a stay based on concerns that Musk has made his offer to close the deal contingent on the receipt of the debt financing, and that payment could fall through. “Counsel for the debt financing parties has advised that each of their clients is prepared to honor its obligations,” Musk’s filing states.

    The filing asks the court to stay the proceedings and order Twitter to complete the deal.

    “Proceeding toward trial is not only an enormous waste of party and judicial resources, it will undermine the ability of the parties to close the transaction,” the filing states. “Instead of allowing the parties to turn their focus to securing the Debt Financing necessary to consummate the transaction and preparing for a transition of the business, the parties will instead remain distracted by completing discovery and an unnecessary trial.”

    In its response letter, Twitter’s lawyers state that Musk’s team has refused “to commit to any closing date.” It added that a representative for one of the banks set to lend to Musk testified Thursday morning that “Mr. Musk has yet to send them a borrowing notice and has not otherwise communicated to them that he intends to close the transaction, let alone on any particular timeline.”

    Twitter’s lawyers added: ‘Defendants should be arranging to close on Monday, October 10.”

    Earlier Thursday, lawyers for Musk and Twitter agreed to postpone the Tesla CEO’s deposition in the court fight, a source familiar with the negotiations told CNN. Musk’s deposition had been set to begin Thursday, per a notice filed earlier this week. It’s not clear whether a new date has been set for Musk’s deposition, but Twitter could end up pushing to complete it early next week if a deal is not reached.

    As of Wednesday, the two sides had yet to reach a deal to close the acquisition, a separate source told CNN. Delaware Chancery Court chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the judge who is overseeing the litigation, said in a Wednesday court filing that neither side had filed to stay the proceedings and she was continuing to prepare for trial to begin on Oct. 17.

    On Thursday, McCormick filed a letter to both sides laying out deadlines for responding to discovery motions, noting that the “trial is fast approaching.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge delays Twitter trial, gives Musk time to seal buyout

    Judge delays Twitter trial, gives Musk time to seal buyout

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A judge has delayed a looming trial between Twitter and Elon Musk, giving the Tesla CEO more time to close his $44 billion deal to buy the company after months spent fighting to get out of it.

    Musk had asked to halt the upcoming Delaware court trial, where the Tesla billionaire was expected to fare poorly against Twitter’s lawsuit to force him to complete his April merger agreement. Musk revived the takeover offer on Monday but said he needed time to get the financing in order.

    Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, head of the Delaware Chancery Court, said Thursday that Musk and Twitter now have until Oct. 28 to close the deal. A trial originally set for Oct. 17 will happen in November if they don’t, she said.

    Twitter had asked McCormick earlier Thursday to proceed with the trial, saying the billionaire refuses to accept the “contractual obligations” of his April agreement to buy the social media company and take it private.

    Twitter disputed Musk’s claim that the San Francisco-based company is refusing to accept his renewed bid. Musk told Twitter earlier this week he’s ready to buy the company once again after trying to back out of the deal over the summer, accusing it of refusing to give him information about “spam bot” accounts on the service.

    Twitter described Musk’s move to delay the trial as “an invitation to further mischief and delay” after his arguments for terminating the agreement haven’t had merit.

    But after the judge’s ruling, Twitter reiterated in a statement that it was ready to close the deal on the share price agreed upon in April: “We look forward to closing the transaction at $54.20 by October 28th,” referring to the price Musk originally offered for each Twitter share.

    Brooklyn Law School professor Andrew Jennings said Twitter wants to be certain that the deal will get done and not allow “wiggle room for Musk to walk away again.”

    Musk attorneys argued that Twitter was disagreeing with the trial delay “based on the theoretical possibility” of Musk not coming up with the financing, which they called “baseless speculation.”

    They said Musk’s financial backers “have indicated that they are prepared to honor their commitments” and are working to close the deal by Oct. 28.

    Musk attorney Alex Spiro said in a statement Thursday that “Twitter offered Mr. Musk billions off the transaction price” but Musk “refused because Twitter attempted to put certain self-serving conditions on the deal.” He didn’t elaborate on what those conditions were. Twitter hasn’t described the talks beyond what its attorneys have said in court.

    Twitter’s shares fell $1.91, or 3.7%, to close at $49.39 on Thursday. It was the stock’s second day of declines following a surge of more than 22% on Tuesday after Musk made his renewed offer to buy the company.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge delays Twitter trial, gives Musk time to seal buyout

    Judge delays Twitter trial, gives Musk time to seal buyout

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A judge has delayed a looming trial between Twitter and Elon Musk, giving Musk more time to close his $44 billion deal to buy the company after months spent fighting to get out of it.

    Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, head of the Delaware Chancery Court, said Thursday that Musk has until Oct. 28 to close the deal. A trial set for Oct. 17 will happen in November if he doesn’t, she said.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

    Twitter is asking a Delaware court to proceed with an upcoming trial against Elon Musk, saying the billionaire refuses to accept the “contractual obligations” of his April agreement to buy the social media company for $44 billion.

    Twitter attorneys sent a letter Thursday to the Delaware Chancery Court’s head judge, not long after Musk’s legal team asked her to call off the trial while he works on a renewed bid to buy the company.

    Twitter disputed Musk’s claim that the San Francisco-based company is refusing to accept the new bid, which Musk told the company about earlier this week after trying to terminate the deal over the summer.

    The company has been seeking a court order to force the completion of the merger and said it intends to close the deal at the agreed-upon price, but described Musk’s move to delay the trial as “an invitation to further mischief and delay.”

    Twitter said Musk should be aiming to close the deal by Monday, ahead of a trial set to begin a week later on Oct. 17.

    “But they aren’t. Instead they refuse to commit to any closing date,” said the letter from Twitter lawyer Kevin Shannon. “They ask for an open-ended out, at the expense of Twitter’s stockholders (who are owed $44 billion plus interest), all the while remaining free to change their minds again or to invent new grounds to avoid the contract.”

    Brooklyn Law School professor Andrew Jennings said Twitter wants to be certain that the deal will get done and not allow “wiggle room for Musk to walk away again.”

    Twitter apparently hasn’t got the certainty it wants.

    “Otherwise, we would’ve seen a joint filing to the court on how the two sides want to proceed,” Jennings said. “As of right now, the trial train keeps rolling until both parties or the court apply the brakes.”

    Musk’s attorneys said earlier Thursday that the trial should be adjourned to leave more time for Musk to secure the financing.

    “Twitter will not take yes for an answer,” said the court filing signed by Musk attorney Edward Micheletti. “Astonishingly, they have insisted on proceeding with this litigation, recklessly putting the deal at risk and gambling with their stockholders’ interests.”

    Eric Talley, a Columbia University law professor, tweeted Thursday that Twitter “is absolutely right not to take ‘yes’ for an answer, and everyone knows why. (They tried that in April and it didn’t go so well).” He added that Twitter would, however, take a “certified bank transfer” from Musk.

    Musk attorneys argue that Twitter is disagreeing with the trial delay “based on the theoretical possibility” of Musk not coming up with the financing, which they call “baseless speculation.”

    They said Musk’s financial backers “have indicated that they are prepared to honor their commitments” and are working to close the deal by Oct. 28, roughly a week after the trial was set to conclude.

    Twitter’s shares fell $1.91, or 3.7%, to close at $49.39 on Thursday. It was the stock’s second day of declines following a surge of more than 22% on Tuesday after Musk made his renewed offer to buy the company.

    [ad_2]

    Source link