Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

6 thoughts on “Reports: Twitter to provide Musk with raw daily tweet data

  1. “without presenting evidence”–LOL, a third-party investigator performed a technical audit that revealed that nearly 50% of our current POTUS’s Twitter followers are almost certain bots. The number is even higher on Musk’s own Twitter account.

    Has Agarwal presented evidence that these charges of “greater than 5%” are false? No, he has dodged the question time and again, using tons of unnecessarily verbiage to try to explain that it’s impossible to quantify and truly capture it all. For G-d’s sake, Parag, at least lie quickly.

    1. Everyone in the world knew that, yet Musk was the fool who signed a deal to buy the company and signed away his rights to do more due diligence.

      He figured out far too late that he’s in way over his head on his one and is trying to come up with a way out. He should just write the break-up check for $1 billion and get out with a minor dent to his ego.

      He’s no different than if a billionaire bought an NBA team and thought the secret to success was recreating the 1990’s Detroit Pistons. Times change, Musk’s attitudes towards free speech on the internet are similarly dated.

    2. You’re right James. He quite possibly initiated the entire sale so that he could shed light on Twitter as a digital Potemkin Village. Defrauding its shareholders and the firms who buy ad space, but it didn’t really matter to the previous board because none (except Jack Dorsey himself) had even more than .5% share.

      They didn’t run the company incompetently because it made them more money. They did it for the power.

      Musk’s “attitudes toward free speech on the internet are only outdated” for the aspiring Weimar-ites who believe the First Amendment is old hat. Mass formation is real, and the collective psychosis affecting half the country has staggering similarities to 1930s Germany. Filed with academics in the highest echelons of power and making generous reference to Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kant, and Hegel (zee great dinkers vere all German!), the had the most power and still were convinced they were oppressed. And they used a state/corporate fusion to stifle dissent while mobilizing through anger toward an ethnic scapegoat.

      Joe, what should the “new and improved” Bill of Rights look like? Given that the internet is the modern public forum, how should regulate speech and still preserve the First Amendment? Or is that another baby we need to throw out with the bathwater?

    3. As to what you’re saying, the First Amendment has nothing to do with it, nor should it. That kind of approach is problematic, be it Twitter be forced to let people ignore their terms of service or Fox News being forced to run the January 6th hearings.

      Your larger issue is the consolidation of media over the past few decades, IMO. But I don’t see anyone bemoaning that.

      As to Musk, he missed out on exactly why all 90’s libertarian approach to internet forums doesn’t work any more. He didn’t fight those battles, he was off doing other useful stuff.

      Don’t trust me. Trust the guy who used to run Reddit and has a fair bit more knowledge on the topic than you or I.

      https://twitter.com/yishan/status/1514938507407421440?s=20&t=Sl_Cbl6YhMhPobz7HacErw

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}