Yes, Elon Musk Is Fucking Up Twitter; But No, The Government Has No Business Getting Involved

So, yes, I’ve written a few things now on Elon’s silly excuses for his frantic speedrun through the content moderation learning curve. It’s getting more mainstream press because of journalist accounts getting banned (including, this morning, Insider’s Linette Lopez, who did not post any “doxing” info but has reported critically on Musk for years, which lead to him harassing her).

And while Musk’s fans have been (hilariously, frankly) trying to defend these decisions by (1) claiming this is somehow “different” because it’s about “safety” — an argument we cleanly debunked this morning — and (2) saying it’s okay because the “liberal” media are now screaming about censorship and free speech, so it’s all hilarious since everyone is switching positions. Except, I haven’t seen much of that supposed “switch.” Lots of people are pointing out that the reasons stated for these suspensions have been silly. And many more people are highlighting how hypocritical the statements and decisions made by Musk are. But most people readily recognize that he has every right to make dumb and hypocritical decisions.

There are a few, however, who do seem to be taking it further. And they should stop, because it’s nonsense. First up we have the EU, where the VP of the European Commission, Vera Jourova, is warning Musk that there will be consequences.

That’s her saying:

News about arbitrary suspension of journalists on Twitter is worrying. EU’s Digital Services Act requires respect of media freedom and fundamental rights. This is reinforced under our #MediaFreedomAct. @elonmusk should be aware of that. There are red lines. And sanctions, soon.

But being banned from private property doesn’t impact “media freedom or fundamental rights.” And it’s silly for Jourova to claim otherwise. No one has a “right” to be on Twitter. And even if the journalism bans are pathetic and silly (and transparently vindictive and petty) that doesn’t mean he’s violated anyone’s rights.

Some in the US are making similar claims, even though the 1st Amendment (backed up by Section 230) clearly protects Musk’s ability to ban whoever he wants for any reason whatsoever. Yet Jason Kint, the CEO of Digital Context Next, a trade organization of “digital media companies” — but which, in practice, often seems notably aligned with the desires of Rupert Murdoch’s news organizations — demanded Congressional hearings if Musk did not “fix this within an hour” (referencing the journalist suspensions).

But that’s silly. Again, his decisions are protected by the 1st Amendment. It’s his property. He can kick anyone out. Just like Fox News can choose not to put anyone on air who would call bullshit on “the big lie” or Rupert Murdoch. That’s their editorial freedom.

And I’d bet that if Congress hauled Lachlan Murdoch in for a hearing to demand he explain to them his editorial decision making practices for Fox News, Kint would be highlighting the massive 1st Amendment-connected chilling effects this would have on any of his member news organizations.

We can mock Musk’s decisions. We can highlight how nonsensical they are. We can pick apart his excuses and the ramblings of his fans and point out how inconsistent they are. But Musk has every right to do this, and that’s exactly how it should be. Getting government involved with editorial decisions leads down a dangerous road.