This business of suing the ADL for Twitter’s advertising woes is very reminiscent of the tantrum of a six-year-old and deserves about as much serious attention. It wouldn’t surprise me if it was a drug-induced tantrum. It also reflects Elmo’s proclivities for blaming everyone but himself for his troubles. I suspect it will all be quietly forgotten as quickly as it arose, but if not, this would be a positively Trumpian level of frivolous abuse of the legal system and is the kind of thing that gets lawyers sanctioned and disbarred.
Maybe Elmo could get Rudy Giuliani on the case if Rudy is still allowed to practice anywhere and isn’t in jail yet.
I’m honestly flabbergasted that he didn’t sign off with ‘Hail Victory’ or ‘Rahowa’.
Hint: ‘our largest enemy’ that ‘the richest man in the world’ is ‘waging total war on’ isn’t the ADL.
They can be subpoenaed to provide a witness or witnesses (“person most knowledgeable” on given topics) in civil depositions and for trial testimony, but their attorneys would no doubt seek to quash the subpoenas. The process certainly won’t endear Musk to them, not least because having to provide witness testimony would also involve document discovery, a time-consuming and expensive endeavor.
Naah. Rudy is already legally toast.
Much better for Elmo to pick a fresh set of 5 or 20 crooked celebrity lawyers to lead into disbarment.
wait … what… ?
That Un guy is sending letters to others, too???
I bet you 300gr of expired dog-food they are not as beautiful as the ones he sent to Don
Un sends love letters to all dictators, both successful and still wannabe.
Musk’s business genius on display:
Point of order: “Kim” is his surname, “Jong-Un” is his personal name. Calling him “Un” is like referring to our current president as “Seph”.
Post:
Musk replies:
Commentary:
I like how you skillfully avoided using first and last name here…
As his first name would be second, just behind the last name which comes first before the first name, even though its his last name 
Where’s Danny Keye when you need him!!!
To put aside consideration of racist motives, I understand that Musk’s general argument is that the ADL is issuing more complaints of TOS violations against particular posts than other individuals and groups. As such, Musk is considering the group to be an advocate of “censorship” and himself to be an advocate of “anti-censorship”.
Now, to make that claim, you would need to demonstrate two things:
- The ADL issues a significant number of take-down requests that exceed the TOS and, specifically…
- The percentage that falls outside the TOS and are denied are excessive relative to other organizations.
It should be noted that the absolute number of take down requests does not matter since:
- The quantity of applicable content (e.g. anti-semitic) is not controlled by the ADL. If there’s a lot of it relative to, say, anti-Belgium content then you would expect the ADL to issue more take-down requests than Belgium does. And while that might say that the ADL take-down request count should fall inside the bounds of a metric on how much anti-semitic content is posted…
- The ADL might just be better organized and have a better process than other groups. All that indicates is that they hired someone who has better tech chops than other groups.
- Correctly reporting a person as having violated the TOS is, by definition, not censorship by the standards of Musk since it’s his own TOS. If he’s defined himself as the authority of what is and isn’t censorship then any fulfilled request by a reasonable, neutral panel, using his TOS, has declared that request to be non-censorial in their reasonable, neutral view.
So, again, the only thing that really matters is the percentage of frivolous take-down notices according to Musk’s TOS. In the long run, I should qualify that to say that you would need an impartial panel to make the determination of whether any particular post was in violation of the TOS. But, in the short run, we can treat Musk’s moderator panel as sufficiently close to that, since we’re not aware of any targeted animosity towards the ADL prior to the last week or so. Probably, the history of moderator decisions has not been influenced by Musk until recently.
So, importantly, this is all information that Musk has access to and could release. If he wants to make the argument, he’s free to post numbers and comparisons.
Musk:
But that’s not true. For example:
I don’t believe this is an accurate characterization of Musk’s complaint. Musk’s complaint is that the ADL is defaming Twitter by telling advertisers that it is a haven for anti-semitic messaging, and is urging those advertisers to stop advertising on Twitter. This is, of course, bullshit.
In other words, Elmo’s complaint is that da Joos the ADL is umm… exercising free speech. I wonder if Mr. free speech absolutist can spot the irony. Actually, never mind, I know he can’t.
This reminds me of trying to fix the problem of too many positive Covid tests by cutting back on Covid testing.
Musk’s anti-semitism problem isn’t caused by ADL complaints, it’s caused by anti-semites flocking to his platform.
You think there is something of substance beneath the racism?
Bless you.
Musk doesn’t think he’s got an anti-Semitism problem. To paraphrase the old joke about excessive drinking:
He’s got anti-Semites. They post. No problem.
Yeah, to not get that the hatred for the ADL is based in anti-Semitism is . . . special.
Not ignorant. Just eyes deliberately pointed elsewhere from where the action is. None so blind as those loudly claiming to not be able to see what they themselves are causing to happen right in front of their face.
Oh I think Musk is absolutely anti-Semitic. No blindness or ignorance about it.