The twitter files showed that, previously, some of the compliance was side channel, which makes the previous compliance rate suspect.

edit: is this not accepted fact, at this point?

Musk has explicitly and repeatedly said that his standard for free speech is that which complies with the law in any given country. The logic is that domestic laws represent the will of their citizens and it shouldn't be a corporation's (or a billionaire's) responsibility to second guess this.

Quote — "By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people." [0]

Quote — "Like I said, my preference is to hew close to the laws of countries in which Twitter operates. If the citizens want something banned, then pass a law to do so, otherwise it should be allowed." [1]

Personally I think this the only sane stance for a corporation like Twitter/X. We shouldn't be looking to capitalist non-democratic corporations as an end-run around governments — especially democratic governments.

[0] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376?lang...

[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1523654106745020418?lang...