ReportWire

Tag: Twitter

  • Elon Musk’s net worth dropped $100 billion this year. Here’s why.

    Elon Musk’s net worth dropped $100 billion this year. Here’s why.

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk’s net worth has dropped to an estimated $195.6 billion, according to Forbes. Musk’s net worth dropped on Tuesday, hitting its lowest point this year. 

    This is the second time since Oct. 1, 2021, that his net worth has dipped below $200 billion, except for a brief drop to $199 billion in May of this year, Forbes reports. 

    His net worth is still astronomical – and enough to solidify his spot as richest man in the world — but Musk’s worth was once larger. In January, he had an estimated worth of $304.2 billion, Forbes says. At that time, his worth had increased about $32.6 billion as Tesla stock soared. 

    That was, of course, before Musk began his acquisition of Twitter in April. In August, he sold nearly 8 million Tesla shares – worth $7 billion – as a legal battle with Twitter loomed. Twitter sued Musk to enforce the rules of their acquisition agreement after Musk tried to back out. Musk then countersued, alleging the company committed fraud, breach of contract and violation of a securities law. 

    A judge paused the case in order to let the deal close, and last month, Musk officially acquired the company for $44 million. 

    The Twitter takeover was a tumultuous one. Musk recently sold another $4 billion in stock to close the gap on the deal – even though he said he was “done selling Tesla stock,” according to Wedbush analysts.

    And this week, he sold another 19.5 million Tesla shares – worth $3.9 billion – over three days, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Forbes reports. He now has sold $19.3 billion in Tesla shares since April. That, combined with the dip in Tesla share price, contributed to the decrease in his net worth. 

    Musk not only lost credibility with investors over his acquisition of Twitter, but also drew ire for the changes he immediately set into motion at the social media company. Many feared his changes to content bans would allow hate speech on the platform. He also fired top executives and a large swath of employees. And, he introduced “Twitter Blue” – a subscription for a blue checkmark that will cost users $7.99 a month – as a way to increase revenue.

    Musk’s net worth is made up of his stock and ownership of the six companies he co-founded, including Tesla, SpaceX and the Boring Company. While he offloaded a ton of Tesla stock, he still owns $445.6 million in Tesla shares, excluding options, according to Forbes.

    He also now owns an estimated 82% of Twitter, after taking the company private with additional help from a $12.5 billion loan from a group of big banks, including Morgan Stanley and Bank of America. 

    He is still ahead of the second richest people in the world, French billionaire Bernard Arnault and his family, who own fashion house LVMH. Their net worth is estimated to be $159.8 billion. Third richest is Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, who gets his $144.7 billion net worth from infrastructure and commodities. Fourth is Amazon and Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos, worth $110.7 billion. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden says Elon Musk’s foreign investors in Twitter are “worth being looked at”

    Biden says Elon Musk’s foreign investors in Twitter are “worth being looked at”

    [ad_1]

    President Biden said on Wednesday that the role of foreign investors in funding Elon Musk’s $44 billion purchase of Twitter is “worth being looked at.”

    Mr. Biden made the comment in response to a question at a press conference about whether Musk’s actions — including securing the backing of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia and Qatar Holding, an investment firm owned by the Arab country’s sovereign wealth fund, to help fund his deal to buy Twitter — could post a threat to U.S. national security. 

    “I think that Elon Musk’s cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at,” Mr. Biden said. “Whether or not he’s doing anything inappropriate, I’m not saying that, but it’s worth being looked at.” 

    Musk financed much of the purchase through his own fortune, but $7.1 billion was provided by equity investors including fellow billionaire Larry Ellison as well as foreign sources, such as Prince Alwaleed and Qatar Holding, according to Reuters. 

    The importance of Twitter “as a platform for political discourse in the U.S.” raises implications for national security, experts with the Brookings Institution, a liberal-leaning think tank, wrote on November 4. In their view, the Twitter deal should be investigated by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, an agency that reviews the national security implications of foreign investment in U.S. companies.


    Twitter asks dozens of former employees to return days after massive layoffs

    06:11

    “Given evolving trends in CFIUS decisions in other cases, President Biden would have strong grounds for blocking Musk’s Twitter acquisition or at the very least compelling the minority foreign investors to sell their equity to parties that would not pose a national security threat,” they said.

    According to Brookings, other investors in Musk’s Twitter purchase have ties to China and the United Arab Emirates. 

    Mr. Biden’s comments come after a turbulent start to Musk’s ownership of Twitter, which has included an advertiser revolt over concerns about the social media service’s oversight of content under his leadership and his decision to fire 3,700 employees, or roughly half its workforce. Meanwhile, Musk’s fortune has plummeted by $100 billion this year as Tesla’s stock price slumps amid the Twitter turmoil. 

    “The Twitter circus show has been an absolute debacle from all angles since Musk bought the platform for all the world to see,” Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said Wednesday in a research note. “When does it end? The focus is Tesla or Twitter? Is this Twitter train wreck situation hurting/tarnishing the global brand of Musk and therefore Tesla?”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter no longer using

    Twitter no longer using

    [ad_1]

    Twitter on Wednesday rolled out a gray “official” check mark next to some social media accounts to indicate that the social media company had verified their authenticity. Within hours, Elon Musk scrapped the plan.

    “I just killed it,” the Tesla CEO and Twitter’s new owner said in reply to a comment by a noted technology blogger. “Blue check will be the great leveler.”

    For a few hours on Friday morning, various accounts appeared with an “official” designation. Media sites like The Associated Press, The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal received an official designation, as did companies like Nike, Apple and Coca-Cola, along with the musician Taylor Swift, CBS Bay Area reported.

    Two-tiered system

    The two-tiered check mark system was designed to replace Twitter’s current “blue checks,” which signify an account’s authenticity. They’re intended to note that an account is verified, or that it really belongs to the person it claims to be. However, most Twitter users understand the blue check marks to be an indicator of importance or influence. 

    Musk said he changed his mind about having the two check marks after deciding it wouldn’t solve Twitter’s problem of a dual-class system.


    Krebs says Twitter turmoil creating “a very chaotic environment” for midterms

    07:14

    “Apart from it being an aesthetic nightmare when looking at the Twitter feed… it was simply another way of creating a two-class system. It wasn’t addressing the core problem, [that] there were too many entities that were considered ‘official,’” he said on a conference call with advertisers on Wednesday.

    “Blue checks” to cost $8

    Twitter’s current system of using blue checks to confirm an account’s authenticity will soon go away for those who don’t pay a monthly fee. Instead, people who pay $8 a month will receive blue checks and have access to some bonus features, such as fewer ads and the ability to have tweets gain greater visibility.

    Experts have expressed concern that making the checkmark available to anyone willing to pay a fee could lead to more impostor accounts, misinformation and scams on Twitter. In a live audio conversation on Twitter Spaces on Wednesday Musk vowed to ban Twitter accounts that were impersonating others, saying the company would “actively suspend accounts engaged in deception or trickery of any kind.”

    “It will be less special, obviously, to have a check mark, but I think this is a good thing,” he said. “Don’t we believe in, one person one vote? I think we do. I actually don’t like the lords-and-peasants situation where some people have blue check marks and some don’t.”

    Musk, who officially took control of Twitter a week ago after completing his $44 billion acquisition, has previously said he’s committed to eliminating spam and bots on the platform. He’s betting that a paywall of $8 a month will raise the bar for authenticity and good behavior, dramatically reducing the amount of harassment and robo-tweets on the platform.

    “Creating a fake account is expretemly cheap. Maybe a tenth of a penny. By charging $8 a month it raises the cost of a bot or troll somewhere between 1,000 and 100,000,” he said Wednesday. “The propensity of someone to engage in hate speech, if they have paid $8 and are risking the suspension of their account, is far, far less.”

    Musk also warned his followers on Wednesday to prepare for plenty more changes on the platform.

    “Please note that Twitter will do lots of dumb things in coming months. We will keep what works & change what doesn’t,” he tweeted.

    For Twitter, however, the clock is ticking as a growing list of major companies suspend their advertising amid concerns their brands might be tarnished on a site that Musk has vowed to make more open. 

    Oreo maker Mondelez International’s CEO Dirk Van de Put told Reuters that the food giant has stopped advertising on Twitter because of a spike in hate speech on the service following Musk’s takeover.

    “What we’ve seen recently since the change on Twitter has been announced, is the amount of hate speech increase significantly,” he said. “We felt there is a risk our advertising would appear next to the wrong messages,” he said. 

    Other companies including Allianz, Audi, General Mills, GM, United Airlines and Pfizer have also paused their ads on Twitter, and more large advertisers are expected to follow suit. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News Wins for Worst Midterm Election Take: ‘These Women Just Went Crazy’

    Fox News Wins for Worst Midterm Election Take: ‘These Women Just Went Crazy’

    [ad_1]

    Via Twitter/Kat Abu/Fox News

    Content warning for ableism and misogyny.

    Yesterday’s midterm elections have turned into an overwhelming victory for Democrats across the country. Slavery of the incarcerated was outlawed in four more states including Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont. Abortion referendums overwhelmingly reinforced protections for women and pregnant people’s right to choose. John Fetterman won in a landslide against Dr. Oz.

    This of course, has Republicans scratching their heads about how they could have lost so badly. Could it be because of their out-of-touch policies that are radically more right than the general population? Could it be because of election deniers who act like spoiled children outright denying reality?

    Well, one Fox News correspondent has come up with the worst reason Republicans lost the midterms: “These women just went crazy.”

    Jim Messina, who is a Democrat and a former Obama campaign manager, attributed the democrats winning over Republicans and Independents, due to women ‘going crazy’ over abortion rights. Which is about the most sexist and ableist way he could have put it.

    Women voters are not the Bacchae, they are not ‘crazy’ or ‘hysterical’ or any other sexist term meant to devalue women’s emotions or opinions. They’re rightfully furious or fearful for their safety.

    Even more hilariously, Messina quickly walked back his comments.

    Thankfully, no one is buying his excuses for the sexist language.

    Unfortunately, this does speak to a larger problem in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Instead of seeing these elections as a wake-up call for what voters are demanding, they see this as a fluke. A temporary moment of fervor that will pass.

    But it’s a movement that is picking up momentum, and one that will not go away quietly.

    And honestly, I could see “these women went crazy” being on a shirt at the next abortion rights rally, alongside all the “Nevertheless, she persisted” badges of honor.

    (image: Twitter)

    The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    [ad_2]

    Kimberly Terasaki

    Source link

  • Opinion: A really bad night for some high-profile Trump-backed candidates | CNN

    Opinion: A really bad night for some high-profile Trump-backed candidates | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    CNN Opinion contributors share their thoughts on the outcome of the 2022 midterm elections. The views expressed in this commentary are their own.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sent a clear message to every Republican voter Tuesday night: My way is the path to a national majority, and former President Donald Trump’s way is the path to future disappointments and continued suffering.

    Four years ago, DeSantis won his first gubernatorial race by less than a percentage point. His nearly 20-point win against Democratic candidate Charlie Crist on Tuesday sent the message that DeSantis, not Trump, can win over the independent voters who decide elections.

    DeSantis’ decisive victory offers a future where the Republican Party might actually win the popular vote in a presidential contest – something that hasn’t been done since George W. Bush in 2004.

    Meanwhile, many of the candidates Trump endorsed in 2022 struggled, and it was clear from CNN exit polls that the former President – with his 37% favorability rating – would be a serious underdog in the 2024 general election should he win the Republican presidential nomination for a third time.

    My friend Patrick Ruffini of Echelon Insights tweeted a key observation: DeSantis commanded huge support among Latinos in 2022 compared to Trump in 2020.

    In 2020, Biden won the heavily Latino Miami-Dade County by seven points. DeSantis flipped the county on Tuesday and ran away with an 11-point win.

    In 2020, Biden won Osceola County by nearly 14 points. This time, DeSantis secured the county by nearly seven points, marking a whopping 21-point swing.

    DeSantis combined his strength among Latinos with his support among working class Whites, suburban white-collar voters and rural Floridians. That’s a coalition that could win nationally, unlike Trump’s limited appeal among several traditional Republican voting segments.

    Last year, it was Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin of Virginia who scored an earthquake in a Biden state by keeping Trump at arm’s length and focusing on the issues. Tonight, it was DeSantis who ran as his own man (Trump rallied for Marco Rubio but not DeSantis at the end of the campaign) and showed what you can do when you combine the political instincts required to be a successful Republican these days with actual governing competence.

    DeSantis made a convincing case that he, rather than Trump, gives Republicans the best chance to defeat Biden (or some other Democrat) in 2024. With Trump plotting a reelection campaign announcement soon, DeSantis has a lot to think about and a solid springboard from which to launch a challenge to the former President.

    Scott Jennings, a CNN contributor and Republican campaign adviser, is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and a former campaign adviser to Sen. Mitch McConnell. He is a partner at RunSwitch Public Relations in Louisville, Kentucky. Follow him on Twitter @ScottJenningsKY.

    Roxanne Jones

    Let it go. If election night confirmed anything for me it is this: We can all – voters, doomscrollers, pundits and election deniers included – stop believing every election revolves around former President Donald Trump. Instead, when asked in exit polls across the country, younger people, women and other voters in key demographics said their top concerns were inflation, abortion rights, crime and other quality of life issues.

    What a relief. It finally feels like a majority of voters want to re-center American politics away from the toxic, conspiracy theory-driven rhetoric we’ve experienced over the past several years.

    Yes, Republicans are still projected to take control of the House of Representatives, with a narrow (and narrowing) majority – but will that make much difference? Despite the advantage Democrats had in the chamber the past two years, President Joe Biden has still had to battle and compromise to get parts of his agenda passed. How the balance of power will settle in the Senate is unclear, with a few races in key states still undecided as of this afternoon. It will likely hinge, again, on Georgia, and a forthcoming runoff election between the incumbent, Democrat Raphael Warnock, and his GOP challenger, former football star Herschel Walker.

    No matter what party you claim, there were positive signs coming out of the midterms. My hometown, Philadelphia, and its surrounding suburbs, came up big in another election – rejecting the Trump-backed New Jersey transplant, Dr. Mehmet Oz, and helping to send Democratic candidate John Fetterman to the US Senate. Pennsylvania voters also rejected an election denier, Doug Mastriano, in the race for state governor, and made history by electing Democrat Summer Lee as the state’s first Black woman to serve in Congress.

    Maryland voters, meanwhile, elected Democrat Wes Moore as their state’s first Black governor. And in New England, Maura Healey became Massachusetts’ first female governor. She’s also the first out lesbian to win a state governorship anywhere in the US.

    Democracy, freedom and equality also won out on ballot issues.

    In unfinished business, voters tackled slavery, permanently abolishing “involuntary servitude” in four states – Vermont, Oregon, Alabama and Tennessee. (Louisiana held on to the slavery clause under its constitution, however.)

    Despite efforts to limit voting rights across the nation, voters in Alabama approved a measure requiring that any change to state election law goes into effect at least six months before a general election. And, in Kentucky, voters narrowly beat back an amendment that would have removed constitutional protections for abortion rights – one of several instances in which voters refused to accept restrictive reproductive rights measures.

    Still, the highlight of my midterms night was watching 25-year-old Maxwell Frost win a US congressional race in Florida – holding a Democratic seat in a state whose 2022 results skewed red, no less. More and more, we are seeing young people energized, voting and stepping up with fresh ideas to lead this democracy. I’m here for it.

    Roxanne Jones, a founding editor of ESPN The Magazine and former vice president at ESPN, has been a producer, reporter and editor at the New York Daily News and The Philadelphia Inquirer. Jones is co-author of “Say it Loud: An Illustrated History of the Black Athlete.” She talks politics, sports and culture weekly on Philadelphia’s 900AM WURD.

    Michael D'Antonio

    Voters made Tuesday a bad night for former President Donald Trump. Despite his efforts, many of his favorites not only lost but denied the GOP the usual out-party wave of wins that come in midterm elections. This leaves a diminished Trump with the challenge of deciding what to do next.

    In the short term, the man who so often returns to his well-worn playbook resumed his years-long effort to ruin Americans’ confidence in any election his team loses. “Protest, protest, protest,” he told his followers, even before all the polls closed. In a sign of his declining power, no mass protests ensued.

    Nevertheless, false claims of election fraud will likely be a major theme if he follows through on his loudly voiced hints that he plans to run for the White House again in 2024.

    To run or not to run is now the main question. It’s not an easy choice. Trump could end up like other one-term presidents he has mocked, George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, who retreated from politics and devoted themselves to new interests. However, he has other options. He could revive his television career – Fox News? – or return to his businesses. Or, he could develop a new role as leader of an organization that can exploit his prodigious fundraising ability, and give him a platform for grabbing attention, while leaving him plenty of time for golf.

    Running could forestall the various legal problems he faces, but he has lawyers who might accomplish the same goal. Fox News is unlikely to pay enough, and his businesses are now being watched by a court-appointed overseer. This leaves him with a combination of easy work – fundraising and pontificating – combined with his favorite pastimes: fame, money and fun. What’s not to like?

    Michael D’Antonio is the author of the book “Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success” and co-author, with Peter Eisner, of the book “High Crimes: The Corruption, Impunity, and Impeachment of Donald Trump.”

    Jill Filipovic

    Democrat Kathy Hochul won the New York State gubernatorial race, and thank goodness. Her opponent, Lee Zeldin, is not your typical moderate Republican who usually stands a chance in a blue state. Instead, he’s an abortion opponent who wanted voters to simply trust he wouldn’t mess with New York’s abortion laws.

    Zeldin was endorsed by the National Rifle Association when he was in Congress. He is a Trump acolyte who voted against certifying the 2020 election in Congress, after texting with former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and reportedly planning to contest the outcome of the 2020 election before the results were even in.

    New Yorkers sent a definitive message: Our values matter, even in moments of profound uncertainty.

    Plus, Hochul made history as the first woman elected to the governor’s office in New York.

    This race was, in its final days, predicted to be closer than it actually was. Part of that was simply the usual electoral math: The minority party typically has an advantage in the midterms, and Republicans are a minority in Washington, DC, with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in Congress. And polling in New York state didn’t look as good for Hochul as it should have in a solidly blue state: Voters who talked to pollsters emphasized crime fears and the economy; abortion rights were galvanizing, but didn’t seem as definitive in an election for a governor vastly unlikely to have an abortion criminalization bill delivered to her desk.

    The polls were imperfect. It turns out that New Yorkers are, in fact, New Yorkers: Not cowed by overblown claims of crime (while I think crime is indeed a problem Democrats should address, New York City remains one of the safest places in the country); determined to defend the racial, ethnic and sexual diversity that makes our state great; and committed to standing up against the tyranny of an anti-democratic party that would force women into pregnancy and childbirth.

    However, Democrats shouldn’t take this win for granted. The issues voters raised – inflation, crime – are real concerns. And the reasons many voters turned out – abortion rights, democratic norms – remain under threat.

    Hochul’s job now is to address voter concerns, while standing up for New York values: Openness, decency, freedom for all. Because that’s what New Yorkers did today: The majority of us didn’t cast our ballots from a place of fear and reaction, but from the last dregs of hope and optimism. We voted for what we want. And we now want our governor to deliver.

    Jill Filipovic is a journalist based in New York and author of the book “OK Boomer, Let’s Talk: How My Generation Got Left Behind.” Follow her on Twitter.

    Douglas Heye

    North Carolina’s Senate race received less attention than contests in some other states – possibly a result of the campaign having lesser-known candidates than states like Georgia, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

    In the waning weeks of the race, multiple polls had the candidates – Democratic former state Supreme Court chief justice Cheri Beasley and Republican US House Rep. Ted Budd – separated by a percentage point or less.

    Perhaps more than in any other Senate campaign, the issue of crime loomed large in North Carolina, with Budd claiming in his speeches that it had become much more dangerous to walk the streets in the state. That talking point, along with his focus on inflation, appeared to help propel him to victory in Tuesday’s vote.

    Beasley, by contrast, focused much of her attention on abortion, making it a central plank of her campaign that she would stand up not just for women’s reproductive rights, but workplace protections and equal pay.

    The two candidates were vying for the seat being vacated by retiring Republican Sen. Richard Burr. Despite being seen as a red state – albeit that is less solidly Republican than neighboring southern states – North Carolina has elected Democrats as five of the last six governors and two of the last six senators.

    Former President Barack Obama won the state in 2008 but lost it in 2012 by one of the closest margins in the nation. And while Donald Trump won the state in 2016 and 2020, he never received 50% of the vote.

    Douglas Heye is the ex-deputy chief of staff to former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a GOP strategist and a CNN political commentator. Follow him on Twitter @dougheye.

    Sophia A. Nelson

    Many of us suspected that Democratic Florida Congresswoman and former House impeachment manager Val Demings would have an uphill battle unseating incumbent Sen. Marco Rubio, and weren’t entirely surprised when she lost the race. With 98% of the vote counted, Rubio won easily, garnering 57.8% of the vote to Demings’ 41.1%.

    As it turns out, Tuesday was a tough night all around for Black women running statewide. Beyond Demings’ loss, Judge Cheri Beasley narrowly lost her Senate bid in North Carolina.

    And in the big heartbreak of the night, Stacey Abrams lost the Georgia governor’s race to Gov. Brian Kemp – a repeat of her defeat to him four years ago, when the two tangled for what at the time was an open seat.

    Abrams shook up the 2018 race by expanding the electoral map, enlisting more women and people of color who turned out in record numbers – but she fell short of punching her ticket to Georgia’s governor’s mansion. And on Tuesday she lost to Kemp by a much wider margin than in 2018.

    Had Abrams succeeded, she would have been the first Black woman to become the governor of a US state. After her second straight electoral loss, America is still waiting for that breakthrough.

    Meanwhile, an ever bigger winner of the night was Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis, who handily defeated Democrat Charlie Crist.

    DeSantis’ big night solidifies what some feel is a compelling claim to front-runner status for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, on what turned out to be a strong election night for Republicans in the state.

    It’s hard for a Democrat to win statewide in the deep South. And as Demings, Beasley and Abrams have shown, it’s particularly tough for a Black woman to win statewide in the region: In fact, it’s never been done.

    All three women were well-qualified and well-funded stars in their party. But, when we look at the final vote tallies, it tells a familiar story. Take Demings, for example, a former law enforcement officer – she was Orlando’s police chief – and yet, she did not get the big law enforcement endorsements. Rubio did, although he never wore the blue.

    That was a big red flag for me, and it showed how much gender and race still play in the minds of male voters and power brokers of my generation and older. For Black women, a double burden of both race and gender at play. It is the nagging story of our lives.

    As for Abrams, I think Kemp was helped by backing away from Trump and modulating his campaign message to appeal to suburban women and independents.

    Abrams, meanwhile, just didn’t have the same support and enthusiasm this time around for her candidacy. And that is unfortunate, but for her to lose by such a big margin says much more.

    At the end of the day however, these three women have nothing to regret. They ran great campaigns, and they created great future platforms for themselves. And they each put one more crack in the glass ceiling facing candidates for the US Senate and governors’ mansions.

    Sophia A. Nelson is a journalist and author of the new book “Be the One You Need: 21 Life Lessons I Learned Taking Care of Everyone but Me.

    David Thornburgh

    Reflections on the morning after Election Day can be a little fuzzy: Chalk it up to a late night, incomplete data and a still-forming narrative. Still, as a longtime Pennsylvania election-watcher, I see three clear takeaways:

    1) Pennsylvanians don’t take to extreme anti-establishment candidates. The GOP candidate for governor, Doug Mastriano, broke the mold of just about any statewide candidate in the last few decades.

    The state that delivered wins to center-right and center-left candidates like my father Gov, Dick Thornburgh, Sen. Bob Casey and Gov, Tom Ridge gave establishment Democrat Josh Shapiro a wipeout double-digit victory.

    2) “You’re not from here and I am” and “Stick it to the man” proved to be sufficiently powerful messages for alt-Democrat John Fetterman to win his Senate race, albeit by a much smaller margin.

    Amplified by more than $300 million in campaign spending (making PA’s the most expensive Senate race in the country), those two simple themes spoke to the quirky, stubborn authenticity that is a longstanding strand of Pennsylvania’s political DNA.

    3) In the home of Independence Hall, independent voters made a significant difference. Pretty much every poll since the beginning of both marquee races showed the two party candidates with locked in lopsided mirror-image margins among members of their own party.

    Over 90% of Democrats said they’d vote for Shapiro or Fetterman and close to 90% of Republicans said the same of Mastriano or Oz. The 20 to 30% of PA voters who consider themselves independent voters may have been more decisive than most tea-leaves readers gave them credit for.

    Most polls showed Shapiro and Fetterman with whopping leads among independent voters. They may not have been the same independent voters: Shapiro’s indy supporters could be former GOP voters disaffected by Trump, and Fetterman’s indy squad could be young voters mobilized by the abortion rights issue (about half of young voters are independents nationally).

    The growing significance of this independent vote in close elections may increase pressure on both parties to repeal closed primaries so that indy voters can vote in those elections. Both parties will want to have more time and opportunity to court them in the future.

    With Florida ripening to a deeper and deeper Red, Pennsylvania may loom larger and larger as the most contested, consequential swing state in the country: well-worth watching as we move inexorably to 2024.

    David Thornburgh is a longtime Pennsylvania civic leader. The former CEO of the Committee of Seventy, he now chairs the group’s Ballot PA initiative to repeal closed primaries. He is the second son of former GOP Governor and US Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.

    Isabelle Schindler

    The line of students registering to vote on Election Day stretched across the University of Michigan campus, with students waiting for over four hours. There was a palpable sense of excitement and urgency around the election on campus. For many young people, especially young women, there was one motivating issue that drove their participation: abortion rights.

    One of the most important and contentious issues on the ballot in Michigan was Proposal 3 (commonly known as Prop 3), which codifies the right to abortion and other reproductive freedoms, such as birth control, into the Michigan state constitution. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, many Michiganders have feared the return of a 1931 law that bans abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, and contains felony criminal penalties for abortion providers.

    Though the courts have prevented that old law from taking effect, voters were eager to enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution, and overwhelmingly voted in favor of Prop 3 with over 55% of voters approving the proposal. This is a major feat given the coordinated campaign against the proposal. Both pro-life groups and the Catholic Church strongly opposed it, and many ads claimed it was “too confusing and too extreme.”

    The issue of abortion was a major focal point of the gubernatorial campaign between Gov, Gretchen Whitmer and her Republican challenger, Tudor Dixon. Pro-Whitmer groups consistently highlighted Dixon’s support of a near-total abortion ban and her past comments that having a rapist’s baby could help a victim heal. Whitmer’s resounding win in the purple state of Michigan is certainly due, in part, to backlash against Dixon’s extreme positions on the issue.

    After the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, so many young voters felt helpless and despondent about the future of abortion rights. However, instead of throwing in the towel, Michigan voters showed up and displayed their support for Whitmer and Prop 3, showing that Michiganders support bodily autonomy and the right to choose.

    Isabelle Schindler is a senior at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy. She is a field director for College Democrats on her campus and has worked as a UMICH Votes Fellow to promote voting.

    Paul Sracic

    From the beginning, the US Senate race in Ohio wasn’t expected to be close. In the end, it wasn’t – with author and political newcomer J.D. Vance defeating Rep. Tim Ryan by over six percentage points.

    Republicans also swept every statewide office in Ohio, including the elections for justices on the Ohio Supreme Court who, for the first time, had their political party listed next to their names on the ballot. This will give the Republicans a dependable majority on state’s highest court, which is significant since there is an ongoing unresolved legal battle over the drawing of state and federal legislative districts.

    It is now safe to say that Ohio, for so long the quintessential swing state, is a Republican state. What happened is simple to explain: White, working-class voters have become a solid part of the Republican coalition in the Buckeye State. In 2016, then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump convinced these voters that the Democratic Party had abandoned them to progressive and internationalist interests with values they did not share. This shift was symbolized by the movement of voters in the former manufacturing hub of Northeast Ohio, once the most Democratic part of the state, to the GOP.

    The question going into 2022 was whether the Republicans could keep these voters if Trump was not on the ballot. The Democrats recruited Rep. Tim Ryan to run for the Senate because he was from Northeast Ohio, having grown up just north of Youngstown. They hoped that he could win those working-class voters back, and Ryan designed his campaign around working-class economic interests, distancing himself from Washington, DC, Democrats and even opposing President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program. Once the votes were counted, however, Ryan performed only slightly better than Biden had in Northeast Ohio. In fact, he even lost Trumbull County, the place where he grew up and whose voters he represented in Washington for two decades.

    Ohio Democrats will face another test in two years, when the Democratic Senate seat held by Sherrod Brown will be on the ballot. Brown won in 2018, but given last night’s result, the Republicans will have no problem recruiting a quality candidate to run for a seat that, right now, at least leans Republican.

    Paul Sracic is a professor of politics and international relations at Youngstown State University and the coauthor of “Ohio Politics and Government” (Congressional Quarterly Press, 2015). Follow him on Twitter at @pasracic.

    Joyce M. Davis

    Pennsylvanians clearly rejected the worst of right-wing extremism on Nov. 8, sending a strong message to former President Donald Trump that his endorsement doesn’t guarantee victory in the Keystone State.

    Trump proved to be a two-time loser in the commonwealth this election cycle, despite stirring up his base with screaming rallies for Republican candidates Dr. Mehmet Oz, Doug Mastriano and Rep. Scott Perry.

    And a lot of people are breathing a long, hard sign of relief.

    Mastriano, who CNN projects will lose the race for the state’s governor to Democrat Josh Shapiro, scared many Pennsylvanians with his brash, take-no-prisoners Trump swagger. He inflamed racial tensions, embraced Christian nationalism, and once said women who violated his proposed abortion ban should be charged with murder. On top of all that, he’s an unapologetic election denier.

    Dr. Oz, meanwhile, couldn’t shake his carpetbagger baggage, and Oprah’s rejection – on November 4, she endorsed his rival and now-victorious candidate in the Senate race, John Fetterman – seems to have carried more weight than Trump’s rallies, at least in the feedback I’ve received from readers and community members.

    All of this should compel some serious soul-searching among Republican leadership in Pennsylvania. What could have they been thinking to place all their marbles on someone so outside of the mainstream as Mastriano? Did they think Pennsylvanians wouldn’t check Oz’s address? Will they rethink their hardline stance on abortion?

    In a widely-watched House race, Harrisburg City Councilwoman Shamaine Daniels made a valiant Democratic effort to unseat GOP Rep. Scott Perry, after the party’s preferred candidate pulled out of the race. But her lack of name recognition and inexperience on the state or national stage impacted her ability to establish a base of her own. So the five-term incumbent, who played a role in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, will return to Washington – though perhaps with a clipped wing.

    Many Pennsylvanians may be staunch conservatives, but we proved we’re not extremists – and we won’t embrace Trump or his candidates if they threaten the very foundations of democracy.

    Joyce M. Davis is outreach and opinion editor for PennLive and The Patriot-News. She is a veteran journalist and author who has lived and worked around the globe, including for National Public Radio, Knight Ridder Newspapers in Washington, DC, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in Prague.

    Edward Lindsey

    In the last two years, President Joe Biden, Sen. Jon Ossoff and Sen. Raphael Warnock, all Democrats, won in the Peach State. There has been a raging debate in Georgia political circles since then as to whether these races signal a long-term left turn toward the Democratic Party, caused by shifting demographics, or whether they were merely a negative reaction to former President Donald Trump. Tuesday’s results point strongly to the latter.

    Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, who had rebuffed Trump’s demand to overturn the 2020 presidential result, cruised to a convincing reelection on Tuesday with a pro-growth message by defeating the Democrats’ rising star Stacey Abrams by some 300,000 votes. His coattails also propelled other Republican state candidates to victory – including the Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger who had also defied the former President – and helped to keep the Georgia General Assembly firmly in GOP hands.

    However, before sliding Georgia from a purple political state back into the solid red state column, we still have one more contest to look forward to: a runoff for the US Senate, echoing what happened in Georgia’s last set of Senate races.

    Georgia requires candidates to win over 50% of the vote and the presence of a Libertarian on the ticket has thrown the heated race between Warnock, the incumbent senator and senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, and Georgia football great Herschel Walker into an overtime runoff campaign to be decided on December 6.

    Both Walker and Warnock survived November 8 to fight another day despite different strong headwinds facing each of them. For Warnock, it has been Biden’s low favorability rating – hovering around 40% nationwide, and only 38% in Georgia, according to Marist. For Walker, it has been the steady drumbeat of personal allegations rolled out over the past few months, some admitted to and others staunchly denied.

    Warnock has faced his challenge by emphasizing his willingness to work across the aisle on some issues and occasionally disagreeing with the President on others. Walker, who is backed by Trump, has pulled from the deep well of admiration many Georgians feel for the former college football star.

    Both of these strategies were strong enough to get them into a runoff, but which strategy will work in that arena? The answer could be crucial to determining which party controls the US Senate, depending on the result of other races that have yet to be called. Stay tuned while Georgians enjoy having the two candidates for Thanksgiving dinner and into the holiday season.

    Edward Lindsey is a former Republican member of the Georgia House of Representatives and its majority whip. He is a lawyer in Atlanta focusing on public policy and political law.

    Brianna N. Mack

    In his bid to win a seat in the US Senate, Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan tried to appeal to working class voters who felt abandoned by establishment Democrats. Those blue collar voters – many of them formerly members of his party – overwhelmingly supported Trump in 2016 and again in 2020.

    Unfortunately for Ryan, his strategy failed. He lost to J.D. Vance by a decisive margin, according to election projections.

    It was, perhaps, a predictable ending for a candidate who threw away the traditional approach of rallying your base and instead courted the almost non-existent, moderate Trump voter. And it’s a shame. Had Ryan won, Ohio would have had two Democratic senators. The last time that happened was almost 30 years ago, when Howard Metzenbaum and John Glenn represented our state.

    But in wooing Republicans and right-leaning moderates, Ryan abandoned many of Ohio’s left-leaning Democrats who brought him to the dance.

    That approach was perhaps most evident in his ads. In a campaign spot in which he is shown tossing a football at various computer screens showing messages he disapproves of, he hurls the ball at one emblazoned with the words “Defund the Police” and dismisses what he disdainfully calls “the culture wars.”

    Another ad showed Ryan, gun in hand, hitting his mark at target practice, as the words “Not too bad for a Democrat” appear on the screen. To imply you’re pro-gun rights when majority of Americans support gun control legislation – and when your party explicitly embraces a pro-gun control stance is bewildering. Ryan’s ads on the economy began to parrot the anti-China rhetoric taken up by Republicans. And when President Joe Biden announced his student debt plan in an effort to invigorate the Democratic bringing economic relief to millions of millennial voters, Ryan opposed the move.

    As a Black woman living in a metropolitan area, I would have liked to see him reach out to communities of color, perhaps by making an appearance with African American members of Ohio’s congressional delegation Rep. Joyce Beatty or Rep. Shontel Brown. But I would have settled for one ad addressing the economic or social concerns of people who don’t live in the Rust Belt.

    Ryan might have won if he’d gotten the kind of robust backing from his own party that Vance got from his – and if he’d courted his Democratic base.

    Brianna N. Mack is an assistant professor of politics and government at Ohio Wesleyan University whose coursework is centered on American political behavior. Her research interests are the political behavior of racial and ethnic minorities. She tweets at @Mack_Musings.

    James Wigderson

    Wisconsin remains as split as ever with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers surviving a challenge from businessman Tim Michels and Republican Sen. Ron Johnson barely holding off a challenge from Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes.

    In late February, Johnson, who Democrats hoped might be a beatable incumbent, was viewed favorably by only 33% of Wisconsin’s voters, according to the Marquette University Law School poll. He was viewed unfavorably by 45% of the electorate with 21% saying they didn’t know what to think of him or hadn’t heard enough about him. He finished the election cycle still seen unfavorably by 46% with 43% of the voters holding a favorable view of him.

    However, Democrats decided to run possibly the worst candidate if they wanted to win against Johnson. At one point in August, the relatively unknown Barnes actually led Johnson by 7%. But familiarity with Barnes didn’t help him. Crime was the third most concerning issue for Wisconsin voters this election cycle, according to the Marquette University Law School poll, and Johnson’s campaign successfully attacked Barnes for statements in support of decreasing or redirecting police funding and for reducing the prison population. In the end, Johnson came out victorious.

    So, with Republicans winning in the Senate, what saved Evers in the gubernatorial race? Perhaps it was women voters.

    The overturning of Roe v. Wade meant Wisconsin’s abortion ban from 1849 went back into effect. Michels supported the no-exceptions law but then flip-flopped and said he could support exceptions for rape and incest. Johnson, for his part, successfully deflected the issue by saying he wanted Wisconsin’s abortion law to go to referendum.

    Another issue that may have soured women voters on Michels was the allegation of a culture of sexual harassment within his company. Evers’ campaign unsurprisingly jumped at the opportunity to argue that “the culture comes from the top.” (In response to the allegations against his company, Michel said: “These unproven allegations do not reflect the training and culture at Michels Corporation. Harassment in the workplace should not be condoned, nor tolerated, nor was it under Michels Corporation leadership.”) Michels’ divisive primary fight against former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch also didn’t help his appeal to women voters, especially in Kleefisch’s home county of Waukesha, formerly a key to a Republican victory in Wisconsin.

    If Republicans are going to win in 2024, they need to figure out how to attract the support of suburban women.

    James Wigderson is the former editor of RightWisconsin.com, a conservative-leaning news website, and the author of a twice-weekly newsletter, “Life, Under Construction.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter adds ‘Official’ label for PM Modi, and some other verified accounts

    Twitter adds ‘Official’ label for PM Modi, and some other verified accounts

    [ad_1]

     An ‘Official’ label has been added to the Twitter handle of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and some other ministers as the US-based social media platform started rolling out a feature to distinguish between the Twitter Blue account and verified accounts.

    Modi’s verified blue tick Twitter handle @narendramodi was marked ‘Official’ with a tick mark enclosed in a circle.

    The same was label was also seen on the Twitter handles of Home Minister Amit Shah, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and some other ministers.

    Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi, some other opposition party leaders as well as sportspersons like Sachin Tendulkar too were given that label.

    This is in line with Twitter’s just-announced changes for verified accounts, as part of its new USD 8 premium subscription product.

    The ‘Official’ label is given for select verified accounts including major media outlets and governments.

    Twitter official Esther Crawford in a tweet said: “A lot of folks have asked about how you’ll be able to distinguish between @TwitterBlue subscribers with blue checkmarks and accounts that are verified as official, which is why we’re introducing the ‘Official’ label to select accounts when we launch.”

    “Not all previously verified accounts will get the ‘Official’ label and the label is not available for purchase. Accounts that will receive it include government accounts, commercial companies, business partners, major media outlets, publishers and some public figures,” she said.

    The new Twitter Blue, she said, does not include ID verification. “It’s an opt-in, paid subscription that offers a blue checkmark and access to select features. We’ll continue to experiment with ways to differentiate between account types.”

    The changes come days after the world’s richest man Elon Musk took over Twitter Inc for USD 44 billion and brought in a slew of changes, including a subscription programme and a new verification system.

    He has announced a USD 8 per month price tag for the Blue Tick verification of handles.

    Twitter’s chargeable blue tick verification service is expected to roll out in India in “less than a month”, Musk had said on Sunday.

    “Hopefully, less than a month,” Musk tweeted in response to a Twitter user’s query on when the service is expected to be launched in India.

    Earlier this month, Musk had announced that verification blue tick in front of a user’s name that authenticates an account will be charged USD 8 per month.

    Twitter’s strategy to introduce a monthly charge for the verified badge has polarised users globally.

    Musk, the CEO of electric car maker Tesla Inc, completed his USD 44-billion takeover of Twitter in October-end, placing the world’s richest man at the helm of one of the most influential social media apps in the world. He also fired the social media company’s four top executives, including CEO Parag Agrawal and legal executive Vijaya Gadde.

    Twitter then proceeded to fire the majority of its over 200 employees in India as part of mass layoffs across the globe ordered by Musk who is looking to make the blockbuster acquisition work.

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter to debut gray ‘official’ check mark to verify government accounts, media and major brands | CNN Business

    Twitter to debut gray ‘official’ check mark to verify government accounts, media and major brands | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN Business
     — 

    Twitter said Tuesday evening that to resolve ambiguity about which accounts on its platform have been identity-verified — as opposed to those simply paying $8 a month for a blue check mark on their profiles — the company will introduce a new, gray check mark as part of an “official” label.

    A screenshot posted by Esther Crawford, a director of product management at the company, showed how the new label would appear. The screenshot displayed Twitter’s own account profile, which included the standard blue check mark beside its display name as well as a gray check mark and the word “Official” underneath its account handle.

    A visit to Twitter’s currently live profile did not display the gray check mark, suggesting the feature has not yet been implemented.

    “Not all previously verified accounts will get the ‘Official’ label and the label is not available for purchase,” Crawford tweeted. “Accounts that will receive it include government accounts, commercial companies, business partners, major media outlets, publishers and some public figures.”

    Crawford also confirmed that the forthcoming option to pay for a blue check mark will not include an identity verification requirement.

    “We’ll continue to experiment with ways to differentiate between account types,” Crawford said.

    In recent days, Twitter has been met with widespread criticism over its plan to change the meaning of the blue check mark away from identifying confirmed individuals, particularly public figures, toward a new meaning signifying that a user has paid for Twitter Blue, the company’s subscription service.

    Election security experts warned of the likelihood that bad actors could pay for a blue check mark, then change their display names to impersonate government officials or other authoritative sources of information.

    After appearing to ready the feature for rollout over the weekend, Twitter later decided to delay the deployment until after the midterms, CNN has previously reported. Also over the weekend, Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk vowed that accounts caught engaging in undisclosed impersonation would be permanently banned without warning, reversing earlier promises that so-called “permabans” would be extremely rare.

    Musk’s announcement came after numerous celebrity accounts used their verified status to mock Musk’s paid verification plan, by modifying their accounts to resemble his.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk Has a Very Bad Surprise for Tesla Shareholders

    Elon Musk Has a Very Bad Surprise for Tesla Shareholders

    [ad_1]

    The fears of Tesla  (TSLA) – Get Free Report shareholders and fans are confirmed. 

    Elon Musk, the CEO of the famous manufacturer of premium electric vehicles, is paying a hefty price for his acquisition of Twitter  (TWTR) – Get Free Report

    And unsurprisingly, Tesla is paying the price. The billionaire has just sold 19.5 million shares of Tesla for a total amount of $3.95 billion, according to regulatory documents filed on November 8 in the evening.

    The sale was completed in 38 transactions on November 4, 7 and 8, just days after the Twitter acquisition was completed. The tech tycoon had taken control of the social network on October 27 after a six-month battle marked by twists and turns and a stop in the courts.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans Elect First Ever (Known) Kingdom Hearts Fan To Congress

    Americans Elect First Ever (Known) Kingdom Hearts Fan To Congress

    [ad_1]

    Maxwell Frost

    Maxwell Frost
    Photo: The Washington Post (Getty Images)

    Amidst a sea of depressing, enraging, mildly promising, and other election results tonight, one victory has proven to be truly inspiring. And it took place in Florida.

    In a state that has voted overwhelmingly in support of goons like Governor Ron DeSantis, Democrat Maxwell Frost won Florida’s 10th Congressional District—based mostly in Orlando—by a landslide, capturing 58.8% of the vote (at time of posting) against his nearest competitor, Republican Calvin Wimbish, on 39.7%.

    Frost’s victory is notable for a number of reasons. You’ll see him hailed in most reports as the “first member of Generation Z elected to Congress, since he is just 25 years old, and don’t get me wrong, that’s an incredible achievement. But we’re here because Frost is, at least on record, also the first Kingdom Hearts fan elected to Congress. Here he is back in 2017:

    Normally digging up a politician’s old tweets is a source in either boredom or frustration, since—given their advanced age—many Congressmen and Senators in the US were already image-conscious politicians by the time they began using the platform.

    But Frost was just 20 when he wrote that Tweet. Just a regular guy, doing what we all used to do on The Hellsite, namely sharing little snippets of the people and things that we love.

    Frost ran because the incumbent, Democratic Val Demings, vacated the seat to try to (unsuccessfully) challenge Marco Rubio in the Senate elections. In a more recent Tweet, he said “WE WON!!!! History was made tonight. We made history for Floridians, for Gen Z, and for everyone who believes we deserve a better future. I am beyond thankful for the opportunity to represent my home in the United States Congress.”

    Just so you don’t think he went straight from being a guy posting about Kingdom Hearts on Twitter to Congress, as NPR reports, Frost has been an activist for almost a decade now, and had previously “served as the national organizing director for March For Our Lives, a group that advocates for gun control policy.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • Musk’s partisan tweets call into question Twitter neutrality

    Musk’s partisan tweets call into question Twitter neutrality

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk used his Twitter megaphone to appeal to “independent-minded voters” on Monday, urging them to vote Republican in Tuesday’s U.S. midterm elections. In doing so, the new CEO of Twitter stepped into a political debate that tech company executives have largely tried to stay out of — so their platforms wouldn’t be seen as favoring one side over the other.

    Musk, who bought Twitter for $44 billion, has expressed political views in the past, on and off the platform. But a direct endorsement of one party over another now that he owns the platform raises questions about Twitter’s ability to remain neutral under the rule of the world’s richest man.

    “Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic,” Musk tweeted.

    It’s one thing for the CEO of Wendy’s or Chick-fil-A to endorse a political party, said Jennifer Stromer-Galley, a professor at Syracuse University who studies social media and politics. It’s a whole other thing, though, for the owner of one of the world’s most high-profile information ecosystems to do so.

    “These social media platforms are not just companies. It’s not just a business. It is also our digital public sphere. It’s our town square,” Stromer-Galley said. “And it feels like the public sphere is increasingly privatized and owned by these companies — and when the heads of these companies put their finger on the scale — it feels like it’s potentially skewing our democracy in harmful ways.”

    Musk’s comments come as he seeks to remake the company and amid widespread concern that recent mass layoffs at the social media platform could leave the company unable to deal with hate speech, misinformation that could impact voter safety and security and actors who seek to cast doubt on the legitimate winners of elections. Though Musk has vowed not to let Twitter become a “free-for-all hellscape,” advertisers have left the platform and Musk himself has amplified misinformation.

    Musk on Sunday tweeted and deleted a link to an article pushing an unfounded conspiracy theory about the attack on Paul Pelosi. The tweet from Musk, posted just three days after he took charge of the platform, raised concerns about the type of content that will be allowed on the social media site under his control.

    It’s not a secret that when it comes to tech workers and executives, the political mix tends to favor the left, with a good amount of Silicon Valley libertarianism thrown in. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, for instance has donated to candidates on both sides of the political spectrum, but in recent years he’s veered more toward Democrats. Publicly he’s stayed away from pledging allegiance to either party.

    But in their platform policies and content moderation, tech companies such as Facebook (now Meta), Google and even Twitter have taken great pains to appear politically neutral, even as they are routinely criticized — largely by conservatives but also by liberals — for favoring one side over the other.

    “Now, you might say, look, Rupert Murdoch owns Fox News and that’s his voice amplified,” said Charles Anthony Smith, a professor of political science and law at The University of California at Irvine. “But the difference is that gets filtered through a variety of different script writers and on-air personalities and all this other sort of stuff. So it’s not really Rupert Murdoch. It may be people that agree with him on things, but it’s filtered through other voices. This is an unadulterated direct contact. So it’s an amplification that is unrivaled.”

    Global feathers rustled

    Musk’s tweets could also stir up trouble in global politics outside of the U.S. elections. On Sunday, the billionaire signaled willingness to explore reversing decisions blocking some accounts of Brazilian right-wing lawmakers. The nation’s electoral court last week ordered their suspension. All are supporters of Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro, who on October 30 lost his reelection bid by a narrow margin to Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Most had aired claims of election fraud.

    Paulo Figueiredo Filho, a political analyst who often defends Bolsonaro on social media and is also the grandson of the military dictatorship’s final president, tweeted that Twitter has become a strict and spontaneous censor.

    “Your moderators are currently being more dictatorial than our own courts!” Figueiredo wrote.

    Musk responded: “I will look into this.”

    The suspended accounts include that of Nikolas Ferreira, who garnered more votes in the October race than any other candidate for a seat in the Lower House. According to orders issued by the electoral authority, Ferreira’s account and most others were blocked for sharing a live video from an Argentinian digital influencer questioning the reliability of Brazil’s electronic voting system. The video was largely shared by allies of Bolsonaro, who himself has often claimed the system is susceptible to fraud, without presenting any evidence.

    “Upsetting the far right and the far left equally”

    Twitter’s policies, as of Monday, prohibit “manipulating or interfering in elections or other civic processes.”

    In a tweet just two days after he agreed to buy Twitter in April, Musk said that for “Twitter to deserve public trust, it must be politically neutral, which effectively means upsetting the far right and the far left equally.”

    And to attract the largest possible number of advertisers and users, Big Tech has tried to go this route, with varying degrees of success. For years, it managed to succeed. But the 2016 U.S. presidential elections changed online discourse, fueling the country’s increased political polarization.

    In early 2016, a tech blog quoted an anonymous former Facebook contractor who said the site downplayed news that conservatives are interested in and artificially boosted liberal issues such as the “BlackLivesMatter” hashtag. The blog did not name the person, and no evidence was provided for their claim.

    But in the explosive political climate that preceded the election of former President Donald Trump, the claim quickly took a life of its own. There was plenty of media coverage, as well as as inquiries from GOP lawmakers, then, later, congressional hearings on the matter. In the years since, as social media companies began to crack down on far-right accounts and conspiracy theories such as QAnon, some conservatives have come to see it as evidence of the platforms’ bias.


    Krebs says Twitter turmoil creating “a very chaotic environment” for midterms

    07:14

    Musk himself is at least listening to such claims, and he’s repeatedly engaged with figures on the right and far-right who would like to see a loosening of Twitter’s misinformation and hate-speech policies.

    Evidence suggests those voices are already being heard. In an October study, for instance, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that “Twitter gives greater visibility to politically conservative news than it does content with a liberal bent.”

    Musk’s tweet garnered hundreds of thousands of likes and many retweets Monday on the day before the final votes are cast in thousands of races around the country. But in replies and retweets, many prominent (and not so prominent) Twitter personalities expressed criticism for the Tesla CEO — often poking fun at him. For Smith, that’s a sign Musk may not quite be a billionaire political kingmaker that some of his peers, like venture capitalist Peter Thiel, are aspiring to be.

    “I wonder if we’re we’re having the emergence of a new type of billionaire, the ones who want to decide what happens and get credit for deciding what happens,” Smith said. “So this more like an oligarchy approach than the old school billionaires who would drop lots of money but then they didn’t want anybody to know their names.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s $56 Billion Tesla Pay Under Review in Delaware Court

    Elon Musk’s $56 Billion Tesla Pay Under Review in Delaware Court

    [ad_1]

    A lot of business — and the attendant court cases — flow through Delaware, and it looks like the CEO of Tesla and “Chief Twit” at Twitter Elon Musk is about to spend some time in the state.


    Justin Sullivan I Getty Images

    Elon Musk at a Tesla event in 2015.

    The world’s richest man acquired Twitter in late October after getting sued by the company in Delaware’s Chancery Court to make him go through with the deal. Now, the same court — and the same judge as the Twitter case, Kathaleen St. J. McCormick — will hear a different case related to Musk on November 14.

    The lawsuit, filed by Tesla shareholder Richard Tornetta, claims that Musk’s board-approved compensation package from 2018 was excessive and breached the board’s duties to shareholders. Further, the suit claims Musk has too much on his plate to pull a compensation package that can go up to a value of over $50 billion, per TechCrunch.

    The legal documents call it “the largest compensation grant in human history,” the outlet noted.

    Tesla and Twitter are both incorporated in Delaware, as are most very large businesses, due to the state’s tax benefits. This is why both cases will be in the state’s Chancery Court. It has “unique competence,” in the nitty-gritty of business law.

    What is the Tesla lawsuit about?

    Musk’s compensation (stock options, salaries, and bonuses) as CEO of Tesla (going back to 2009) was pegged to performance, as noted in the 2019 pre-trial opinion from Joseph R. Slights III, who was formerly vice chancellor of the Court of Chancery. (McCormick took over the case from Slights.)

    After Tesla met the goals outlined in past compensation packages, the board created a new one for Musk and voted to approve it in January 2018.

    The new package set a series of 12 performance goals, and corresponding groups of stocks, related to Tesla’s ability to increase its market capitalization, as well as revenue and earnings. Upon hitting those goals “corresponding to each tranche of the Award, options held by Musk representing 1% of Tesla’s current total outstanding shares will vest,” Slights wrote.

    This means that Musk would earn the equivalent of 1% of the company’s total outstanding shares. If he met all of those goals, Slights added, the maximum value of the total stock grant is $55.8 billion. The company has met 11 out of 12 so far, per TechCrunch.

    Tornetta sued in 2019 saying that the package was too large and did not motivate Musk to focus on Tesla versus his other ventures. Musk, of course, is a busy man. He is the listed CEO of Tesla and SpaceX and now Twitter, at least in the interim.

    Related: Elon Musk’s Twitter Mass Layoffs Have Begun: ‘Has The Red Wedding Started?

    Musk’s legal team has said that a one-of-a-kind, high-powered CEO deserves a high-impact compensation package.

    “The plan designed and approved by the board was not a typical pay package intended to compensate the ordinary executive for overseeing the day-to-day operations of a mature company,” a Musk attorney, Evan Chesler, wrote in a filing, per Bloomberg Law. “That is because Musk is not the typical CEO.”

    Further, the lawsuit claimed that because Musk is friends with board members Ira Ehrenpreis and James Murdoch, he generally exerts too much influence over it — despite recusing himself and his brother Kimbal from the compensation discussion — and the decision was not fair, according to TechCrunch.

    The question of whether or not there was a conflict of interest is part of why the Slights initially denied Musk’s attempt to dismiss the suit.

    Typically, the court would leave executive compensation up to a company, and “this court’s earnest deference to board determinations relating to executive compensation does not jibe with our reflexive suspicion when a board transacts with a controlling stockholder,” Slights wrote in the 2019 opinion.

    Whether to not Musk was operating as a controlling stakeholder (Musk owns the largest stake in Tesla but not the majority, leaving it up for debate) will likely come up again as McCormick hears the case, one expert told Bloomberg Law.

    Generally speaking, “this has the potential to be a very important case from an executive compensation standpoint,” business law professor at the University of Pennsylvania Jill Fisch told the outlet.

    “It won’t get the attention the Musk-Twitter case got from the general public, but it’s still important,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Gabrielle Bienasz

    Source link

  • WSJ News Exclusive | Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

    WSJ News Exclusive | Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Says He Is Accountable as Company Preps for Mass Layoffs

    [ad_1]

    Layoffs are to begin on Wednesday morning, the CEO told hundreds of executives on Tuesday

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Bitcoin Falls Below $20,000 After Twitter Row Between Billionaire Crypto Executives Triggers Withdrawals From FTX

    Bitcoin Falls Below $20,000 After Twitter Row Between Billionaire Crypto Executives Triggers Withdrawals From FTX

    [ad_1]

    WATCH

    3:18

    | Nov 08, 2022, 11:11AM EST

    The price of bitcoin fell below $20,000 on Monday—dropping alongside other major cryptocurrencies—amid concerns about the financial health of FTX a day after competitor Binance announced it would dump FTX’s token.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk may have taken on $13 billion in debt to buy Twitter, but with his unparalleled brilliance, he’ll earn it back in no time. Here are the most genius ways Elon Musk will make the social media platform profitable.

    Slip And Fall Scam

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Just in case you’re wondering why Elon Musk is writhing in pain outside Twitter HQ.

    Holding Fired Employees Upside Down And Shaking Them Until Loose Change Falls Out

    Holding Fired Employees Upside Down And Shaking Them Until Loose Change Falls Out

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Gotta be worth a try.

    Good Old-Fashioned Tax Evasion

    Good Old-Fashioned Tax Evasion

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    If it works for his other companies, it’ll work for Twitter.

    Two-Drink Minimum

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Twitter is better after a few drinks anyway.

    Adding Reels, Shorts, Stories, Blogs, Forums, Chat Rooms, Maps, Streaming, Bidding, VR, Dating, And Ride-Sharing

    Adding Reels, Shorts, Stories, Blogs, Forums, Chat Rooms, Maps, Streaming, Bidding, VR, Dating, And Ride-Sharing

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    One of them has got to work!

    Save Costs By Making The Site A Little Dimmer

    Save Costs By Making The Site A Little Dimmer

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    The site will also go completely dark during times when no one is using it.

    Charge People To Not Be On Twitter

    Charge People To Not Be On Twitter

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    There are an estimated 240 million active users worldwide, but this pales in comparison to the 7.7 billion people not using Twitter. That’s where the real money is.

    Buying All Other Major Social Media Platforms And Running Them Into The Ground

    Buying All Other Major Social Media Platforms And Running Them Into The Ground

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    If Twitter is the only option, people will have to give it a shot.

    Rentable Tweets

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Instead of retweeting, Twitter users will be able to rent a limited number of views on favorite tweets.

    Charging For Ability To Stop Typing

    Charging For Ability To Stop Typing

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Free users will be forced to keep typing until their fingers atrophy and the tendons in their hands snap.

    Replacing Staff With His Own Underpaid Progeny

    Replacing Staff With His Own Underpaid Progeny

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    He’s well on his way.

    Self-Tweeting Technology

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Taking notes from the success of Tesla, Musk plans to roll out a feature that will take all of the stress out of tweeting by automatically generating thoughts and opinions for its users.

    Merch

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    He could sell shirts or something.

    The Sound Of Someone Repeating The C-Word Loudly Plays Until Users Pay To Mute It

    The Sound Of Someone Repeating The C-Word Loudly Plays Until Users Pay To Mute It

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    As a bonus, users will also get to chose what the next automatically played slur will be.

    Canceling His Car Insurance

    Canceling His Car Insurance

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Trimming the fat in his own personal expenses will help focus his financial goals.

    Add A Paid Tier For People Who Want Access To Easily Dox Journalists And Public Officials

    Add A Paid Tier For People Who Want Access To Easily Dox Journalists And Public Officials

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    For too long, people have been able to threaten journalists and public officials without generating a direct profit for the social media platform.

    Changing Its Name To TikTok

    Changing Its Name To TikTok

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    He’ll definitely get sued, but it’ll temporarily boost users in the confused idiot demographic.

    Killing Two-Thirds Of Twitter’s Workforce

    Killing Two-Thirds Of Twitter’s Workforce

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    Dead people can’t collect severance or file wrongful termination lawsuits.

    Increase Profits

    Image for article titled Most Brilliant Ways Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable

    The man truly is a genius.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kathy Griffin suspended from Twitter for impersonating Elon Musk | CNN Business

    Kathy Griffin suspended from Twitter for impersonating Elon Musk | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Twitter has suspended comedian Kathy Griffin for impersonating the company’s new owner, Elon Musk.

    Griffin appeared to be the first celebrity to lose her tweeting privileges after a wave of prominent users impersonated Musk over the weekend, with the goal of underscoring potential flaws in the social media company’s plans for a revised verification system.

    Musk has made an $8 Twitter subscription plan his signature bid to bolster the company’s revenue. The new plan was hastily rolled out over the weekend before the company ultimately decided to delay the service until after the midterms.

    The updated Twitter Blue subscription plan gives paying users the ability to get a blue check mark on their profiles, an option previously available exclusively to verified celebrities, politicians, journalists and other public figures. Musk proposed the new feature as a way to fight spam on the platform.

    But the partially rolled-out plan faced widespread backlash, and in a display of defiance, some celebrities on the platform posed as Musk over the weekend, complete with a blue check mark on their profiles.

    Comedian Sarah Silverman used her verified account to troll Musk, copying his profile picture, cover image and name. The only thing distinguishing a tweet coming Silverman’s account was the @SarahKSilverman handle.

    “I am a freedom of speech absolutist and I eat doody for breakfast every day,” Silverman tweeted Saturday. Her account also retweeted posts supporting Democratic candidates.

    Silverman’s account was labeled as “temporarily restricted” Sunday, with a warning that “there has been some unusual activity from this account” shown to visitors before clicking through to the profile. The comedian then changed her account back to its usual form, complete with her own name and image.

    Television actress Valerie Bertinelli similarly changed her account name to the Twitter CEO’s, tweeting Friday that “[t]he blue checkmark simply meant your identity was verified. Scammers would have a harder time impersonating you. That no longer applies. Good luck out there!” She then answered a follower who asked how the checkmark no longer applies, writing, “[y]ou can buy a blue check mark for $7.99 a month without verifying who you are.”

    After changing her profile name to Musk, Bertinelli tweeted and retweeted support for several Democratic candidates and hashtags, including “VoteBlueForDemocracy” and “#VoteBlueIn2022.”

    The actress changed her account name back to Valerie Bertinelli Sunday, tweeting, “[o]key-dokey I’ve had my fun and I think I made my point.”

    On Sunday, Musk tweeted that, “Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying ‘parody’ will be permanently suspended.” He also tweeted that a name change on Twitter will “cause temporary loss of verified checkmark.”

    Additionally, Musk said Twitter users will no longer receive warning before being suspended. “This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue,” he tweeted.

    Griffin’s account remained suspended Monday morning, and it was unclear how long it would remain in effect. Musk mocked Griffin Sunday, quipping that “she was suspended for impersonating a comedian.” Musk also tweeted that Griffin could get her account back by paying $8 a month for Twitter Blue, although it wasn’t clear whether Musk was serious.

    CNN fired Griffin in 2017 after the comedian was photographed holding up a bloody head resembling that of then-President Donald Trump. Griffin had co-hosted the New Year’s Eve program alongside Anderson Cooper for a decade.

    The crackdown on accounts comes in the wake of Musk purchasing the company and pledging to restore the accounts of users who were previously banned from the platform, most notably Trump. Musk has also said he will limit the company’s content restrictions and require the paid subscription for account verification.

    In recent months, Musk has shared conspiracy theories about the attack on Paul Pelosi, called Democrats the party of “division & hate,” compared Twitter’s former CEO to Joseph Stalin and warned that “the woke mind virus will destroy civilization.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 11/7: CBS News Prime Time

    11/7: CBS News Prime Time

    [ad_1]

    11/7: CBS News Prime Time – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    John Dickerson reports on the key races to watch in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania, a possible hurricane heading for Florida, and Elon Musk’s continued controversial takeover of Twitter.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What is Mastodon? And Why Is Elon Musk Already Joking About It

    What is Mastodon? And Why Is Elon Musk Already Joking About It

    [ad_1]

    Amid Elon Musk’s chaotic, first few weeks owning Twitter thousands of users have joined a new, similar social media network, Mastodon.

    Eugen Rochko, CEO of Mastodon, said in an interview with CNN last week that it has gained 230,000 users since Musk closed the deal to acquire Twitter. The network hit 1 million active monthly users on Monday.

    “It is not as large as Twitter, obviously, but it is the biggest that this network has ever been,” he said.

    TIME also ran an interview with Rochko over the weekend. On Monday, in the wake of all the press, Musk, the new Twitter owner and CEO, Tweeted (and then deleted) a crude joke about the platform.

    “If you don’t like Twitter anymore, there is an awesome site called Masterbatedone,” he wrote.

    What is Mastodon?

    Mastodon is a text-based social network. It’s also a little bit like Discord, in the sense that you can join “servers” of various interest groups. They exist in a “federation” with one another, (and Mastodon exists in a larger “Fediverse” of various social networks) and anyone can start one. When you sign up, you’re offered a list of many to join.

    Right now, since its user base is so small, there are pretty limited server groups. There were only a few offered LGBTQ options, for example, in Korean, French, and Portuguese.

    Mastodon app. Signing up for servers.

    Rochko is a software developer born in Germany. He told TIME he began working on creating the website after feeling like Twitter had “top-down control” over its content.

    “I was thinking that being able to express myself online to my friends through short messages was very important to me, important also to the world, and that maybe it should not be in the hands of a single corporation,” he told the outlet. He further told CNN it was more of a side or passion project.

    It shares a name with both an extinct elephant cousin-bull and an American heavy metal band, but he said he “called it Mastodon because I’m not good at naming things,” Rochko told TIME.

    The platform is not funded, unlike other social media upstarts such as BeReal or Clubhouse, with millions in venture capitalist funding. Instead, it’s crowdfunded.

    How does Mastodon make money?

    The company makes money mostly through monthly contributions from users or companies. Individuals can sign up on Patreon in tiers ranging from $1 a month to $500, or companies can sign up to sponsor the platform, which gives the company a link on Mastodon’s website.

    According to just the company’s Patreon, it currently has 3,091 patrons who contribute $15,610 a month.

    Content moderation also has a community approach. Rochko told TIME that users are empowered to regulate content on their servers. Then, he added, if someone starts a server with a hateful purpose, the company doesn’t promote it, and it ends up being “ostracized” by the wider circle of people on the app.

    Rochko said he disagrees with Musk’s opinions on free speech. Musk has said social media platforms should not regulate anything that is not illegal (that does not include hate speech) then later said he will not let the platform become a “free for all hellscape.”

    “Allowing free speech by just allowing all speech is not actually leading to free speech, it just leads to a cesspit of hate,” Rochko said.

    Twitter technically has rules about hate speech (even now). But, it remains to be seen how the platform will be moderated. Last week, Musk fired half of Twitter’s staff, including a key voice in platform moderation, Vijaya Gadde, upon taking over the company.

    Researchers from Montclair State University found that there was an increase in hate speech right after Musk took over. Sarah T. Roberts, a Mastodon user and an associate professor at UCLA, told CNN that this could lead people to jump ship for other platforms.

    Mastodon, meanwhile, is buzzing with its newfound fame. On one of the channel’s more popular servers, “climatejustice.social,” users have referenced a “Twitter migration” and claimed thousands of users have recently joined the server.

    “It seems the #TwitterMigration is not slowing down, but still very much speeding up,” @PaulaToThePeople wrote on the platform.

    [ad_2]

    Gabrielle Bienasz

    Source link

  • Kathy Griffin has been suspended from Twitter after impersonating Elon Musk. But she found a way back on.

    Kathy Griffin has been suspended from Twitter after impersonating Elon Musk. But she found a way back on.

    [ad_1]

    Kathy Griffin was suspended from Twitter after using her account to impersonate Elon Musk. After Griffin and other people changed their display names to “Elon Musk,” the new Twitter chief tweeted that accounts that engage in impersonation will be permanently suspended.

    In a series of tweets on Sunday, Musk said unless the impersonation is clearly a parody, the person behind it will be suspended. He also said there will no be warning before suspension, which was customary before.

    Musk announced last week that those who want a blue check that verifies their account will now have to pay $7.99 a month, a subscription plan he is calling “Twitter Blue.”

    The blue checks used to verify the identities of public figures on the platform. It appears anyone will be able to pay for a blue check now, which could lead to confusion and a rise in disinformation. A person who pays for blue check could, in theory, change their name on the platform and appear to be a verified celebrity.

    However, Musk said changing the name of a verified account could lead to a temporary loss of the blue check.

    Griffin had changed her display name and her profile picture to a photo of Musk, she told Bloomberg. Those who didn’t look close would assume it was Musk’s account.

    After being suspended, Griffin posted on Mastodon, an alternative social media platform. “I guess not ALL the content moderators were let go? Lol,” she joked.

    Musk also commented on Griffin’s suspension with a dig at the comedian. When someone tweeted that Griffin was suspended for impersonating Musk, he replied: “Actually, she was suspended for impersonating a comedian.”

    Over on Mastodon, Griffin continued to post about how she was “wreaking havoc” on Twitter, calling Musk a “drama queen.” She also started to tweet from her mother, Maggie Griffin’s Twitter account. She died in 2020, and her account had not posted any updates since 2019.

    Griffin tweeted #FreeKathy from her mother’s account and retweeted people who did the same, including “Star Wars” actor Mark Hamill. She soon started trending on Twitter. She said Musk tweeted to her mom’s account, but there is no evidence of him doing so.

    Griffin has been embroiled in a Twitter controversy before, when she tweeted an offensive image of her holding a likeness of former President Donald Trump’s head in 2017. The comedian posted an apology video, but faced consequences: Her comedy tour was canceled, she lost endorsements and she said she was under investigation for conspiracy to assassinate the president.

    Over the weekend, actor and cooking show host Valerie Bertinelli also changed her Twitter name to Elon Musk and tweeted support for Democratic candidates, so it looked like Musk was doing so. She quickly changed back to her true identity and was not suspended.

    “Okey-dokey I’ve had my fun and I think I made my point. I’m just not a ‘trending’ kind of gal. Never have been, never want to be. Have a safe Sunday everyone!” Bertinelli tweeted.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gigi Hadid becomes the latest celebrity to deactivate her Twitter account after Elon Musk’s takeover

    Gigi Hadid becomes the latest celebrity to deactivate her Twitter account after Elon Musk’s takeover

    [ad_1]

    Model Gigi Hadid has become the latest celebrity to deactivate her Twitter account after Elon Musk took over the company and began making immediate changes.

    On Instagram, Hadid posted a story explaining she had deactivated her Twitter account because for a long time and “especially with its new leadership, it’s becoming more and more of a cesspool of hate & bigotry,” according to screenshots of the story, which has expired.

    The 27-year-old said Twitter is not a place she wants to be a part of even though she connected with many fans on the social media platform. “But I can’t say it’s a safe place for anyone, nor a social platform that will do more good than harm,” she wrote.

    On her story, she also shared a post from MSNBC host Ayman Mohyeldin, who shared a tweet from a former Twitter employee claiming that the “entire Human Rights team has been cut from the company.”

    Musk began the acquisition process in April and when he officially took over the company last month, he immediately made plans to fire at least half of Twitter’s employees. Last week, the layoffs began, with the company saying in an email to its employees that job reductions were “necessary to ensure the company’s success moving forward.”

    Musk also promised to change the platform’s current content moderation and bans. Many fear the changes will allow hate speech and inappropriate content on the platform, and as a result, several other celebrities and high-profile people have vowed to leave.

    Shonda Rhimes, Toni Braxton, Sara Bareilles and Tea Leoni are among the high-profile people who have ditched Twitter following Musk’s acquisition of the company.

    Braxton said she was appalled by the changes she saw after Musk acquired the company and vowed to stay off of it. “I’m shocked and appalled at some of the ‘free speech’ I’ve seen on this platform since its acquisition. Hate speech under the veil of ‘free speech’ is unacceptable; therefore I am choosing to stay off Twitter as it is no longer a safe space for myself, my sons and other POC,” she wrote.

    “Not hanging around for whatever Elon has planned. Bye,” screenwriter and producer Rhimes tweeted two days after Musk officially bought the company. She hasn’t tweeted since.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s Indian-origin advisor defends Twitter’s $8 charge, gives four reasons

    Elon Musk’s Indian-origin advisor defends Twitter’s $8 charge, gives four reasons

    [ad_1]

    Twitter’s new boss Elon Musk has come under heavy criticism for introducing an $8 charge per month for blue tick verification. Despite stiff opposition, Musk has refused to reconsider the move and said that it is the only way to defeat the bots and trolls on Twitter. Now, his Indian-origin advisor Sriram Krishnan has also defended the subscription service while pointing to some flaws in the current system for verification.

    Krishnan in a series of tweets today said that several of the critiques of the paid verification are logically inconsistent. He listed four reasons to back his claim that subscription will reduce impersonation on the site. He said using a CC/mobile checkout dramatically increases friction, and everyone caught impersonating will lose their money – something which Musk also said earlier.

    The techie further said that there are lots of people who should be verified and aren’t and then there are those who should not be verified but are. He then said that the current path on any social network is opaque and easily gamed. “$8 gives a consistent path for anyone regardless of their level of notability ( which is subjective),” he added.

    Krishnan said the current model also has severe spam issues. He then asked people to check out any reply to Vitalik (@VitalikButerin) or Elon Musk (@elonmusk) and they will see lots of hacked blue check accounts. The techie said giving blue checks in $8 makes those attacks less valuable.

    “Finally, verification on social media was originally meant to solve for “this person is who they say they are”. It was NOT meant to say “we judge this person to be notable”. This brings it back to the original spirit of the design. No more DMing employees for a favor,” Krishnan said.

    Musk’s advisor further wrote that like any launch he is sure there will be room for improvement and changes but he is excited for the first change in how verification works in social media in a very long time.

    A day after Musk bought Twitter in a $44 billion deal, Krishnan announced that he was helping the Tesla CEO with the new company. He in a tweet on October 31 wrote: “Now that the word is out: I’m helping out @elonmusk with Twitter temporarily with some other great people. I ( and a16z) believe this is a hugely important company and can have a great impact on the world and Elon is the person to make it happen.”

    The Twitter CEO in a series of tweets on November 1 announced that blue tick will cost $8. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link