I’m sure that the reinstated MTG will come along to explain.
I haven’t been ‘silent’ but I didn’t specifically address the responses to my query for reasons why Twitter is an important platform for journalism because I didn’t really have anything else to contribute. I’ve read the responses—or ‘rebuttals’ as you refer to them—and while I am still not really convinced that the demise of Twitter is a critical blow to modern journalism, I think they all made valid points based upon their experience in the use of the platform, and there were no statements that were objectively false or that I felt required contention on my part. As I noted in my original statement, I am not a journalist and my dislike for the use of Twitter stems from how I see it being used from the perspective of a news consumer, i.e. as a ‘crutch’ to make up for not doing research or independently verifying information, and in the case of CNN.com, to literally puff out their stories to ‘newsy’ length without any real contribution.
That some journalists use the platform as a way to connect to sources is a perfectly valid counter, and while it wouldn’t be my go-to method, again it isn’t my vocation or area of expertise. I would still contend that it has created a culture where (some) journalists shoot from the hip with their comments, often to the detriment to reputation, but you can call that a misuse of the platform rather than an inherent problem with it (although I think it, and to an extent other social media, are purpose designed to elicit that kind of response). I suspect we are going to see what a post-Twitter world will look like (or at least, this version of the platform) and while I personally don’t believe that is going to be for the worse, I understand and sympathize with the disruption this ill-conceived takeover of the platform by a mendacious rich idiot who has made no concessions toward people using the platform for legitimate business or social connections versus as a way to ‘express’ every thought-fart that passes between his ears, and apparently eliminating al controls to prevent its dominance by would-be demagogues and conspiranoists.
Stranger
Legal Eagle has done an analysis of the legal mess that Musk is in. As always his channel does a great job.
Every company card I have had required me to sign an agreement and said I was responsible for the charges. This is also true for cards issued to employees by treasury department I worked in, a small business I run, and a small nonprofit for which I am on the board of directors. You make it seem like this would be some weird and rare thing. I think the only advantage to the corporate card for the applicant is that the bank may dispense with credit checks since they know the applicant has a job.
It may not be to your benefit but the company may require it. The company can monitor all the spending on the card, which gives them insight into expected expenses even before employees file the report. The company also gets the benefit of rewards programs. For example, my current employer gets upfront discounts on travel when employees use the corporate card through a particular travel agency (which we are also required to use). A former employer got cash back every year on their corporate card, which offset the cost of the program.
He might still have some touch with reality but he knows he is completely free to say batshit crazy things without repercussion. Doing so has worked out surprisingly well for years for him and his friend Donald so he is going all in on the strategy.
The laziest journalism in the world is the news “story” that amounts to “a bunch of people you’ve never heard of on Twitter said something about someone.” The good news is that type of story seemed to reach its peak a couple/few years ago and I am seeing less and less of it.
Causes me to wonder what dirt Trump has on Elon or what dirt Elon has on Trump? I get a sort of Mutual Assured Destruction vibe out of this idea.
Not that I can see any of the rest of your posts since I block Twitter (and Facebook) at my network firewall and at my device firewall. They’re both two-baggers for sure.
So, pretty real then?
I think one way to frame this is that one of the few things that really made Twitter distinctive was the verification system for public figures–even fairly minor public figures. A relatively reliable verification system is important. And of course that’s one of the first things he broke.
I wonder if he’s referring to the advertisers themselves. Maybe in his mind any advertiser who pulled out is a political/social activist group.
What, you don’t want your Coke ad to be sponsoring a white supremacist tweet? Woke Coke is what I say!
He did meet with NAACP and some other groups. This is probably what he is referring to.
So, Musk is claiming that they “broke the deal”?
Does he have any evidence of them reaching out to advertisers and try to kill twitter?
Big companies also negotiate discounts at major hotel chains depending on spending through their cards, even if you did not go through the travel agency. In all the cards I’ve had, air travel was direct billed to the company if you went through the travel agency, but you got to keep the miles.
When I started at AT&T they had no card and when I traveled they direct billed rental cars and airlines, and we got cash advances for hotel and meals. Getting a card was a big plus.
Wellllll…maybe, maybe not. It’s been disputed (I mean in court, no less) and is all a bit murky. The motivations and concerns of that Twitter poster aside, there is enough in there (court documents, unspecified degree) to make it look a little hinky. No certainty - just suspicious.
Well, it wouldn’t be the first time.
Stranger
Related to Musk’s education claims, from a Quora question
My opinion and intuition is that he was never admitted in the first place; he sold a lie with the purpose of bringing him closer to the Stanford student body’s considerable talent and resources. The below excerpt is taken from Ashlee Vance’s 2015 biography of Musk, in which to my knowledge the first public claims of Musk’s acceptance to Stanford appeared:
“While playing detective, O’Reilly unearthed some information about Musk’s past that’s arguably more interesting than the allegations in the lawsuit. He found that the University of Pennsylvania granted Musk’s degrees in 1997—two years later than what Musk has cited. I called Penn’s registrar and verified these findings. Copies of Musk’s records show that he received a dual degree in economics and physics in May 1997. O’Reilly also subpoenaed the registrar’s office at Stanford to verify Musk’s admittance in 1995 for his doctorate work in physics. “Based on the information you provided, we are unable to locate a record in our office for Elon Musk,” wrote the director of graduate admissions. When asked during the case to produce a document verifying Musk’s enrollment at Stanford, Musk’s attorney declined and called the request “unduly burdensome.” I contacted a number of Stanford physics professors who taught in 1995, and they either failed to respond or didn’t remember Musk. Doug Osheroff, a Nobel Prize winner and department chair at the time, said, “I don’t think I knew Elon, and am pretty sure that he was not in the Physics Department.”
Now, Quora isn’t always reliable, but I find the quote from the biography credible.
So, Elon Musk had an undergraduate degree from Wharton in Physics and Economics. Got it. That’s what I said.
I never said a word about his post-graduate activities. We were talking about his degree in Physics, not a Ph.D program.
Well, it does show a pattern of lying about his education.
There’s also the issue of Musk receiving his degrees years after he left Pennsylvania, without completing the coursework. They appear to be honorary.
Elon had a public chat with right-wing hatemonger Andy Ngo, banned antifascist reporter Chad Loder for no apparent reason, then unbanned him within less than an hour when people noticed the timing.
You were wrong. For one thing, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania does not award degrees in physics or any other field other than economics (with one of 21 business-related concentrations).
For another, Musk obtained two diplomas from UPenn in 1997, two years after he had left the university and moved to California. One is a Wharton Economics BS, and one has a blank degree field. There’s no record of Musk having completed requirements for a UPenn physics degree or having a diploma in physics.