@tony Don't go back, we will make fediverse a more welcoming and positive community to support your journalism.
If you go back, then you will be beholden to that erratic authoritarian behavior (erratic because there's no consequences to what they do, and because they treat human as garbage that can be exploited)
I mean, you're back now as is Micah Lee. But Keith Olbermann and Linette Lopez aren't yet.
NYT is still spinning Musk porn besides
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/16/technology/elon-musk-management-style.html
@Kubar69 But did he ever have it to lose? If I were any of these journalists (and I'm not), I'd accept the reinstatement, delete all my tweets & put my new socmed details in my bio. Talk about an abusive relationship...
“I want to thank everyone for all the support and kind words over the past day and some change. I was pretty bummed about getting suspended initially but quickly realized it’d be fine because I’m blessed to have an amazing online community. Seriously, I appreciate it a lot. Cheers”
@tony says a great deal about your journalistic integrity when you can be led around by the nose by a man child.
How the hell do you expect anyone to respect your credibility when you go crawling back after this? Did they cut a deal, did they make promises not to report on things.. will they not cover items that might upset lord emperor?
It took me less than a week to realize the danger Musk presents and leave, these companies and people still on the platform are complicit at this point.
I think any journalist who operates in an environment where they concede that they could be banned at any moment is succumbing to a form of voluntary censorship. I experienced this in South Africa, as others did I am sure and remember the idea of 'banning'.
Having experienced this I assure you it's not the mark of a 'free speech' environment.
You can read about it here. https://www.britannica.com/topic/banning-South-African-law
Banning, in South Africa, an administrative action by which publications, organizations, or assemblies could be outlawed and suppressed and individual persons could be placed under severe restrictions of their freedom of travel, association, and speech. Banning was an important tool in the South
I think any journalist who operates in an environment where they concede that they could be banned at any moment is succumbing to a form of voluntary censorship. I experienced this in South Africa, as others did I am sure and remember the idea of 'banning'.
Having experienced this I assure you it's not the mark of a 'free speech' environment.
You can read about it here. https://www.britannica.com/topic/banning-South-African-law
Banning, in South Africa, an administrative action by which publications, organizations, or assemblies could be outlawed and suppressed and individual persons could be placed under severe restrictions of their freedom of travel, association, and speech. Banning was an important tool in the South
People could've left when he started reinstating disinfo networks.
People could've left when he started reinstating trolls.
People could've left when he started--virally--supporting extreme RW talking points.
People could've left when he promoted LibsofTikTok as a victim while they were instigating hate & violence against children's hospitals.
People could've left when he started harassing individuals like Yoel Roth.
Will people leave now that he's banning journalists on whim?