Elongate: Musk’s Twitter bans make a mockery of conservative complaints

Subscribe Now Choose a package that suits your preferences.
Start Free Account Get access to 7 premium stories every month for FREE!
Already a Subscriber? Current print subscriber? Activate your complimentary Digital account.

In April, when Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter, he spoke in elevated terms about fulfilling a high moral purpose. “I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy,” he said, adding “since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.”

Read that again, then read the news, then laugh hard for an hour. The transformation under Musk’s private ownership, still underway, now consists of barring prominent journalists who covered him and his suspension of an account that, using publicly available data, tracked his private jet’s movements.

Such a tantrum is perfectly legal; the sole proprietor of a social media platform is under no obligation to keep it open to anyone. But by succumbing so quickly to the very censorious tendencies he decried, Musk, the self-proclaimed ”free speech absolutist,” becomes the joke and the punchline at the very same time.

Musk’s fit of pique simultaneously pulls the mask off the conservative critics who have spent years railing against so-called Twitter “shadow bans” while pushing for legislation that would force privately run networks to host many more speakers who violate terms of service intended to prevent bigoted attacks, bullying, incitement and other uncivil speech.

Those critics, who claim to revere the Constitution, are comically wrong when they claim that Twitter and Facebook and other privately run online communities are subject to the First Amendment, which only limits government from abridging expression — while effectively protecting the right of companies to act as moderators.

With a straight face, Musk claims merely to be enforcing the company’s own rules, but that’s bogus. He’s just the king lashing out against troublemaking subjects. That it’s his right to be so wrong cannot paper over a hypocrisy every bit as swollen as the head that wears the crown.

— New York Daily News