FAFO Diplomacy: Scott Jennings Explains How Colombia F’d Around with Trump and Found...
Large Group Terrorizes Drivers Blocking Streets in Dallas While Demanding Open Border with...
J.B. Pritzker Should Ask Colombia How Opposing Trump's Immigration Policies Worked Out
Doctors With Borders: Dr. Phil Makes Surprise Appearance in Chicago Criminal Illegal Alien...
Chuck Schumer Is Saddened the Left-Wing Vandals Democrats Love Finally Hit a Business...
LOL: Check Out How Poorly These Leftist Posts on Colombia Aged
DISHONEST: Check Out How Much Time WaPo Gave Steven Cheung to Respond to...
Dawn of Deportations: ICE Makes Morning Illegal Alien Arrests in Democrat Sanctuary City...
Not Our Problem: Haitian Leader Says Trump's Policies Will Be Catastrophic for His...
Democrats Suddenly Realize Eggs Are Expensive Days After Biden’s Exit
J.D. Vance Drops a TRUTH BOMB on U.S. Catholic Bishops Over Immigration Opposition
Race-Baiting Grifter Al Sharpton Becomes the Spokesperson for Costco’s Discriminatory DEI...
They Really Mean It THIS Time! New Yorker Says Trump Is a Fascist...
Party Crashers: DEA and ICE Take Nearly 50 Tren de Aragua Gang Members...
Shot Across the Bow: Trump Warns Teachers Who Push Trans Ideology on Kids...

L.A. Times explores Elon Musk's paradoxical 'less democracy, more freedom' vision for Twitter

Elon Musk’s bid to take over Twitter has brought with it a parade of media hot takes like no other. Here’s the latest:

Advertisement

So… more freedom means less “democracy”? Yeah, we’re confused too.

Well that’s certainly one way to look at it.

Behind Musk’s headline-grabbing gambit, however serious — and many question if it is serious — is a philosophical juxtaposition of two theories of how to manage and promote free speech as a social-media company in 2022. It’s a war between the public and the private, the controlled and the chaotic, the ESG investor crowd and the philosopher-troll king.

Over the years, like many publicly traded companies, Twitter’s more socialized investor structure has allowed oversight and activism by dissatisfied investors. As part of the broader movement in many industries to take environmental, social and governance factors into account, some shareholders have pushed for resolutions urging the company to, among other issues, take greater responsibility for the content on its services.

The problem these days is that the word “democracy” has been co-opted and re-defined as “Democrat narrative,” and therefore if something’s called “bad for democracy” it can simply be translated to mean “bad for Democrats.”

Advertisement

It’s helpful to Democrats, and therefore “democratic” according to the Left.

It’s worth noting that the L.A. Times is owned by a capital firm headed by a man with a reported net worth of over $7 billion. But billionaires such as Patrick Soon-Shiong or Jeff Bezos owning media doesn’t seem to be such a trigger to the left of center.

“Called it!” – G. Orwell

We probably should have put the “beverage warning” at the top of this story.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement