Presumably buying a Tesla and believing that its the best car in the world, also that Elon musk did everything alone and he's the reason Tesla exists(not true, elon didn't create Tesla).
The things he said about freedom of speech ("free speech absolutism", etc.) made a great impact on people. To be fair, there was also some merit in that narrative as censorship was indeed happening in Twitter 1.0.
It's quite easy for a commoner or pleb to think that Elon Musk is single handedly taking on the "mighty establishment" on behalf of the common people. The "Modern day Robin Hood" is a kool-aide stereotype which isn't easy to shake off and Elon seems to have been successful so far in that narrative pitch.
They're the right-wing commentators and conspiracy theorists who see Twitter as everything wrong with modern society[0]. To them, no matter what Musk does, it'll be beneficial for them. Either Musk reworks the platform to be amenable to them or he drives the company in the ground. Right now he's doing both, so for them it's an absolute win.
That's the flavor of kool-aid Musk is deliberately drinking from and once you realize that, most of his actions make some amount of sense (whilst also having a distressingly low concern about his personal fortune, something which makes it clear that when it comes to right-wing radicalization, he's firmly within the "sucker" group, rather than the "grifter" group; the latter is flexible with their beliefs if it risks losing personal profits, Musk isn't), like the utter nothingburger that is the "Twitter files"[1].
[0]: Point of clarity - this is the people who Musk surrounds himself with, I am not saying anyone who thinks twitter is negative on society is a right wing commentator or conspiracy theorist. Musk specifically is talking and listening to policy advice from these two groups and this is what those groups generally believe.
[1]: Which so far have been extremely boring and generic content moderation requests rather than proof of any "inside jobs" and restatements of old news.
Absolutely not. Musk fans tend to decide good/bad based off of “Musk idea”/“not Musk idea”
Somewhere there’s somebody crafting some version of an “Uptime and usability are ideas from a beta cuck mentality, in this thread I will show that slow-loading brain pill ads on a website facing a mass exodus are the sign of virility and strength…” post right now.
"I fully support Musk taking over Twitter. He is a free speech absolutist and will end censorship."
"Of course you can't have people impersonating others, even for comedy. That's just dangerous."
"Those journalists had it coming. They anyways just post fake news. No one has the right to a Twitter account."
"It's a private company. He can ban whoever he wants. The guy shouldn't have shared locations of his jet."
"Third party clients cut into Twitter's revenue and give nothing back. They deserve to be cut off."
Note that e.g. reinstating far-right accounts banned for hate speech is "free speech" but banning leftist or progressive accounts doesn't contradict that. Only one side of the political divide loves to portray itself as "centrist" to hide its actual beliefs and values.
Are they though? I thought money loss at twitter was at an all time high
Do you want to guess how much it lost in 2022? Hint: Elon Musk's buyout forced Twitter to take on $13 Billion debt... estimated to be $1.3 Billion in interest payments per year.
This "Headcount" fallacy seems to be just the pro-Elon Musk crowd ignoring the fact that the #1 and #2 sources of Twitter's financial woes are:
1. The aforementioned Loan.
2. The $2.5 Billion (estimated) loss in advertiser revenue.
Twitters losses in 2023 will be astronomical. It will not be possible to ignore Twitter's loan issues, or their loss in advertiser revenue.
I am not a fan of Elon Musk, for what it’s worth, and I’m sorry that you felt the need to make this some kind of tribal battle instead of a productive discussion. Twitter’s financial issues were well known before Musk became involved, and it is widely agreed that he greatly overpaid for the company. Nothing he has done with the company should impress anyone at this point. The point stands that the company was going to be experiencing major pain even without him.
$3.8 Billion / year of that pain is directly attributable to Musk, in a company that only had $5 Billion/year revenue.
Its really that simple. Look at the advertising losses due to Elon Musk's right-wing redpilling of the world... and add the $1.3 Billion loan structure Elon Musk is directly responsible for. There's no need to overthink this. We can actually calculate how much revenue Twitter is losing directly related to Elon Musk's behavior.
---------
If you want to argue otherwise, you need to start putting down at least some napkin-level estimates to where the other losses-of-revenue came from for Twitter. Or you need to chip away at the $3.8 Billion number I posted above.
Coming into a $5 Billion revenue company and immediately causing $3.8 Billion (combination lost revenue and new liabilities) is very impressive. I don't think I've ever seen someone wipe out... 76% of a company's revenue in just 3 months before.
The problems you're trying to discuss are almost entirely irrelevant to Twitter's current woes. The actual problems are measured in the $Billions/year size. The problems you discuss are perhaps only a few dozen million/year.
> You are shadowboxing.
You are making a mountain out of a molehill. The $million mistakes should be ignored for the $Billion mistakes happening right now.