226
Elon Musk Threatens To Sue Anti-Defamation League For X’s Lost Ad Revenue
(www.huffpost.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
226 points (91.9% liked)
News
23305 readers
3749 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This argument of theirs is so strange. Don't advertisers too have free speech? Is the right wing arguing that advertisers shouldn't be allowed to choose to stop advertising with Twitter? What "pressure" can ADL put on them? Does the ADL have legal authority to force advertisers to exit Twitter? No. Is the ADL holding private information about the CEOs of advertisers and extorting the advertisers to leave? Not likely.
Is the ADL communicating a position that the majority of the advertiser's customers find the racist, fascist, and misogynistic content now omnipresent on Twitter distasteful, and therefore harmful to the advertisers' brands and with negative impacts to future sales? Likely yes, but those statements are themselves free speech on the part of the ADL.
What the right wing seems to be arguing is that the definition of free speech should be the right to say whatever racist, fascist, and misogynistic comments they like without anyone making choices of their own to dissociate with the right wing. That's not free speech that's....fascism!
Honestly? Musk might be so used to big business wining in court that he thinks they might just reflexively take his side.
I remember around 2020, a lot of freethinkers began spouting something about how Twitter is "a platform not a publisher" and therefore users are entitled to treat the website like a public meeting place and protected by first amendment rights, etc.
It was basically a Soverign Citizen argument about how Section 230 means websites don't have the authority to moderate content at all, and it died down after Trump stopped preaching it after he launched Truth
Some articles about the notion:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/no-section-230-does-not-require-platforms-be-neutral
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/publisher-or-platform-it-doesnt-matter
I think you're taking that quote of mine with an unintended meaning. I didn't mean to suggest advertisers have right to post what they want, rather they have the choice to NOT post if they don't want to. The right-wing argument appears to suggest that advertisers should be powerless to choose or not choose to advertise. Suggesting they are wheat to be harvested. A resource owned by the company they are purchasing advertising from; its a bizarre notion.
It’s never ok to hurt somebody’s business just because you disagree with them giving free speech to everybody. The ADL should pay Elon for the damage they did to his business
Why not? It's free speech if I denounce a business for their positions, is it not?
Or are you saying you disagree with free speech?
No, that’s not free speech. Free speech is supposed to be for protecting businesses, not for hurting them. If you hurt somebody’s business, you gotta pay for that. Freedom isn’t free.
Ok, you got me, I should have read your username lmao
Excellent satire