The War on Musk: Washington Post Slammed Over Twitter Hit Piece

Twitter LogoLast week, there was another bombshell story by the Washington Post on the purported evil that is Elon Musk.  Quickly amplified by MSNBC and other media, it was another hit job on Musk and could be viewed as what many in the media love to call “disinformation.” Musk himself noted that the premise of the piece (that his tweets were artificially boosted during a recent period) was demonstrably false. Yet, the countervailing facts found little space in the long Post piece. None of that is particularly surprising. Musk became a hunted man when he sought to restore free speech protections to social media. The media regularly offers him little quarter or consideration. However, what was most striking was that the underlying controversy may have been Musk’s targeting of “bots” in his restructuring of Twitter.

The Post story was written with the usual telltale signs of a hit piece. First, there was the breathless headline (notably amplified on its own Twitter account) expressing a combination of shock and scorn: “Elon Musk reinvents Twitter for the benefit of a power user: Himself.” Then came the lead line of how Musk had transformed the company into the “billionaire’s personal sandbox.” It reported how Musk ran amok at Twitter headquarters firing people in a rage over the failure to artificially boost his own tweets in the system. It portrays employees cowering from his wrath and rushing to change algorithms to increase his tweet visibility.

Musk immediately responded with a simple but seemingly major point: there was no such spike or adjustment. He tweeted “Several major media sources incorrectly reported that my Tweets were boosted above normal levels earlier this week. A review of my Tweet likes & views over the past 6 months, especially as a ratio of followers, shows this to be false. We did have a bug that briefly caused replies to have the same prominence as primary Tweets, but that has now been fixed.”

The Musk tweets do not necessarily end the controversy but it raises core factual questions that seemed to be largely omitted in the Post coverage. Indeed, it was simply ignored by media who continued to push the narrative regardless of the serious questions over the premise of the article. Sound familiar? The Russian collusion scandal, the Hunter Biden “Russian Disinformation,” the Lafayette Park “Photo Op” conspiracy, the Nick Sandmann controversy, the Jussie Smollett case, the Migrant Whipping scandal. This list seems endless of false stories where the “facts were too good to check.” However, that is not “disinformation.”  Not at all.

If you read the Post piece, it becomes clear what the real fight at Twitter may have been over. Buried in the piece is this observation: “Even before he bought Twitter, Musk emphasized the site’s need to crack down on spam and bots, particularly those shilling cryptocurrency.” The Post noted that Musk declared before buying the company that  “If our Twitter bid succeeds, we will defeat the spam bots or die trying!”

Musk has been riding roughshod over engineers to remove certain algorithms and combat bots to restore the company’s transparency and integrity.

Bots and AI systems, however, have a growing alliance in Washington.

Democratic leaders have called for a type of “enlightened algorithms” to frame what citizens access on the internet. In 2021, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called for algorithms to be created to protect people from their own bad choices. She was upset that people were not listening to the informed views of herself and leading experts. Instead, they were reading views of skeptics by searching Amazon and finding books by “prominent spreaders of misinformation.” She denounced Amazon and declared that “this pattern and practice of misbehavior suggests that Amazon is either unwilling or unable to modify its business practices to prevent the spread of falsehoods or the sale of inappropriate products.” She gave the company 14 days to change its algorithms to throttle and obstruct efforts to read opposing views.

More recently, Bill Gates seemed to go “full Borg” in calling for AI to stop certain views from being “magnified by digital channels.” The problem is that we allow “various conspiracy theories like QAnon or whatever to be blasted out by people who wanted to believe those things.” Gates added that AI can combat “political polarization” by checking “confirmation bias.”

So AI overlords will bring unity through forced content assimilation where, to paraphrase the Borg, “free speech is futile.”

The Post does not go to bat for bots like Gates in this piece and even acknowledges that ” it wasn’t that crypto bots weren’t a problem,” but then returns to the Musk press mosh pit.

I previously discussed how Washington has gone to war with Twitter with an alliance of political, corporate, and media interests. It has been unrelenting and includes a campaign to get companies to suspend or reduce advertising until censorship is restored. The media has kept a steady stream of hit pieces on Musk that often border on wartime propaganda.

Musk is not perfect. No one is and being a billionaire gives you a billion ways to magnify your own idiosyncrasies. However, Musk has brought a level of transparency to Twitter (and his own controversies) that is unmatched in any social media company.

I will admit to a bias in favor of Musk as a long-standing free speech advocate. I previously wrote that, despite his incredible achievements in space and transportation technology, Musk’s greatest legacy may prove his defense of free speech. His release of the Twitter Files has revealed a comprehensive system of censorship coordinated with the government. He has also restored free speech protection to a major social media platform. The move is transformative and historic.

The campaign against Musk reflects a degree of desperation as the control of social media collapsed with his purchase. If you are to control speech on social media, it must be complete and total. Musk shattered that unified front and, with it, the ability to maintain approved narratives by silencing critics and barring particular views. Elon Musk did not “reinvent” Twitter as much as restore Twitter to what it was. However, there is a reinvention of journalism in a new and more menacing image.

151 thoughts on “The War on Musk: Washington Post Slammed Over Twitter Hit Piece”

  1. Some headlines of things previously discussed. What we hear from the left are those things where the facts aren’t clear so the left can spin and lie about them. This is what happens in the news afterward.

    FBI has until March 1 to turn over info of probe targeting parents after stonewalling under Dems

    Disinformation index collapses after targeting conservative media content

    House Oversight gives details on how it will investigate Biden admin’s ‘Afghanistan catastrophe’

    U.S. on ‘unsustainable’ financial path, Government Accountability Office warns
    In fiscal year 2022, the federal government spent $6.27 trillion and collected $4.9 trillion in revenue,

    About 145,000 baby formula cans recalled over possible bacteria contamination amid ongoing shortage

    Soros prosecutor delayed trial for accused robber who allegedly destroyed student’s legs this month
    Daniel Riley accused of running down volleyball player, costing her both her legs … Kim Gardner was allegedly unprepared for the armed robbery trial of Daniel Riley last July “even though the robbery happened in 2020,”

    1. S. Meyer,
      Just read about the US on “unsustainable’ financial path.
      A professor from the U of Mich, said the costs of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are so large, just taxing the rich is not going to cover it. THAT is how big those costs are.
      He said we would need a value added tax (VAT), that will hit all end consumers.
      Watch how inflation and COL is hitting Americans now, I think a VAT would eat into their purchasing power more so than now.
      Might force inflation down into deflation but at the cost of stagflation where Americans are running twice as hard just to stand still.

      1. Where is the necessary and proper Judicial Review?

        Congress has the power to tax for and fund ONLY debt, defense and general Welfare, aka basic infrastructure.

        Individual welfare, specific welfare, particular welfare, favor and charity may not be taxed for or funded.

        Social Security and Medicare are taxed for and funded to serve an extremely small segment of the population, and must be accomplished in the private sector.

        Article 1, Section 8

        The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States;…

        1. Necessary and proper judicial review by the Supreme Court has already occurred — see Helvering v Davis (1937) that held Social Security was constitutional.

      2. Upstate, everything we do makes things more complicated. We cannot abruptly end Medicare or social security, but we can deal with making the markets more oriented to the Consume. That would bring prices down. Many decades ago, we could have made healthcare a profit center, drawing patients from all over the world. Instead, we adopted parts of healthcare systems that have impoverished the people.

        The end of Medicare would have to be a long-term project where we revamp the below 65 healthcare programs and gradually let a strong market-oriented healthcare system enter the Medicare market.

        If originally a market-oriented path was taken, we would have better healthcare today and left a lot more money in the pockets of consumers.

  2. I got the Washington Post FREE a few years ago because I bought a new Kindle. I cancelled it after a few weeks because it was overpriced

  3. birds don’t lie and when do they roost?which is probably at ‘re state usolicitor didn’t cross buster about the video .. Because it doesn’t fit their natural bird time line. When they roost. The state relies on their so developed the line…..which is so not related to reality of course they didn’t ask question of buster about the snap bc snap can be are now sent way later.

  4. birds don’t lie and when do they roost?which is probably at ‘re state solicitor didn’t cross buster about the video .. Because it doesn’t fit their natural bird time line. When they roost. The state relies on their so developed the line…..which is so not related to reality of course they didn’t ask question of buster about the snap bc snap can be are now sent way later.

  5. The Washington Post is a CIA-controlled propaganda organization and has been since the 1950s, when it signed up to be part of Operation Mockingbird. The Watergate story that was “broken” by star “reporters” Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein was a CIA operation to get rid of Nixon, who was pissing off the CIA by repeatedly asking them if they killed John F. Kennedy. They never denied it, incidentally. But they did decide to take Nixon out with a fake scandal. The Watergate “burglars” were CIA assets. So was Bob Woodward, whose source was FBI associate director Mark Felt. The Post is completely fake. Everything it does is fake. A lot of people think “Democracy dies in darkness” is just a slogan. To the Post, it’s the goal.

      1. David, you continue to post but didn’t respond to the question about Fascism. Your source proved you wrong. I provided information, but you moved away from the discussion without responding. You do that frequently. Is that how professors in Seattle are supposed to respond?

        Paul Schulte called you out for this behavior. It seems to be chronic.

  6. The first editor of the Washington Post was Frederick Aiken, Union Colonel and Counsel for the Defense of Mary Surratt.

    Aiken won a new trial for Surratt and made history, but the writ of habeas corpus was suspended by President Johnson – Aiken never practiced law again.

    So much for adherence to the “manifest tenor” of the law by “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, his successor, President Johnson et al.

    “In the early morning hours of July 7, Surratt’s lawyers — Frederick Aiken and John Clampitt — went to the home of Justice Andrew Wylie of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia to apply for a writ of habeas corpus. They argued that in time of peace civilians could not be tried before a military commission — an argument that would be sustained by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Ex Parte Milligan the following year. Aiken and Clampitt woke Justice Wylie, who came to the door in his pajamas. Justice Wylie issued the writ at 3:00 a.m., making it returnable that morning at 10:00 a.m.”

    “Just after 10:00, General Hancock, who had custody of Mrs. Surratt, and Attorney General James Speed arrived in the courtroom and announced that President Johnson had suspended the writ of habeas corpus “in such cases as this.” Justice Wylie then explained that the writ of habeas corpus was “dear and sacred to every lover of liberty” and “indispensable to the protection of citizens,” but noted that the Court’s jurisdiction “yields to the suspension of the writ” by the President. Mary Surratt was executed that afternoon.”


  7. I guess Elon Musk is a ‘nazi’ too!

    S@@tlibs help me with this one, I’m just an ignorant deplorable and need your morally superior and wise judgment.


  8. OT,
    Biden gave a speech in Warsaw, Poland stating,
    “A dictator bent on rebuilding an empire will never be able to ease the people’s love of liberty. Brutality will never grind down the will of the free. And Ukraine — Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia. Never.”
    He just committed the US to WWIII, nuclear Armageddon, or a long war.
    For all those under the age of 35, even females, who voted for Biden, you should be reporting to your local military recruitment center to enlist. Be sure to sign for a combat MOS. Be that troop on the front line of WWIII.
    And if it is a long war, tell your children or grandchildren, you expect them to sign up as soon as they can to fight and die for Biden’s war.

    1. Yeah, Estovir, we should just let Putin have Ukraine.. and Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland. None of those countries are worth fighting for. In fact, Putin is a Christian Nationalist. That makes him a good guy! ..Not..!

      1. As I have stated on this blog before, what needs to happen is to get the Ukraine and Russia to the peace table, and hammer out a truce. Neither side gets everything it wants, they both have to compromise. Then put a DMZ between the two.
        Stop the killing.
        Stop the escalation towards WWIII and or nuclear Armageddon.

        You really think Russia is going to attempt a two or multi-front war? I seem to recall another war in which some yahoo attempted that, against Russia, and did not turn out so well for them.

        And this war has nothing to do with the Ukraine. It is a war of a uni-polar one vs a emerging multi-polar one.

        1. Upstate, this is not just one war. Those involved are using Ukraine as a tabulator for wins and losses. There are many ways of looking at this picture. Based on international law, Russia is illegally occupying Crimea and some territory surrounding Russia. However, in many areas, the Russian population is high. They might prefer Russian rule. Countries demand security, and to Russia, a Nato involved Ukraine might threaten that, and such thinking existed before Putin.

          This war is very complex and will end only when the powers controlling the chess pieces desire such an end.

          If one works their way backward in time, one will see a tiny shift could have prevented this war that the US is getting more involved in. All one needs to understand is that there is a high likelihood no war would exist if Trump were President. There was a reason war existed before and after, but not during Trump’s administration.

    2. It’s Korea and Vietnam all over again. And making all the same mistakes, the worst of which is not really going all in.

      I’m against any involvement at all but once you are involved, why tie your hands behind your back. If Biden has decided we cannot take out the launch sites of the missles, drones, etc. that are attacking Kiev, Lviv, Odessa, etc and other sites well west of the battle zone, then he has decided “No Ukraine is not really worth fighting for.” It’s pretty binary

  9. Here’s an interesting theory. This is what I have seen so far from the research I have been doing all morning.

    Republicans are currently pursuing. “Hearings” to determine why twitter chose to “censor” the Hunter Biden laptop story. They say it’s all about censoring conservatives and their views. But a very different story emerges from the very same people who are making such claims.

    Twitter refused to let the laptop story trend for a day. One day. Rudy Giuliani who is the person who was contacted about the laptop by this shady fella at his store took a copy of the hard drive and went FIRST to Fox News. It was his first choice. Keep in mind that this is just a few weeks before the election and it was within the same time frame he was peddling Trump’s voter fraud BS. Remember, we now know Fox News KNEW Rudy’s and Sidney Powell’s peddling of Trump’s voter fraud claims were BS and they were already being sued by Dominion over giuliani’s and Powell’s BS claims. Rudy went to Fox News with the laptop story when Fox KNEW Rudy was not a credible source for anything. They REFUSED to take the story because they has serious apprehensions about the veracity of the story. They already knew Rudy was full of $hit with the voter fraud claims. Why would they take another story from him?

    We know that even the NY Post reporters refused to put their names on the story because it was not vetted and it was from…Rudy giuliani. I believe that within the journalists in the industry, even the conservatives, knew Rudy and Powell were not credible sources and anything they passed on to publish was seen with a high degree of skepticism. As we all now know the hesitance to publish was well founded since they were literally peddling Trump’s BS. Even Word press was seriously considering not publishing the story. They did chose to but that was after really not being very comfortable with the knowledge that the story when it first came out was very sketchy. Fox News turned it down. Rudy’s second choice was the NYpost which is much closer to a tabloid than a respectable newspaper, but even they had deep reservations and it seems someone was really pushing for the story to be published despite the fact that reporters were refusing to put their names on the byline. Two eventually did, but I suspect it was under pressure.

    A lot of trump supporters in congress privately knew Trump was lying about the election being stolen. But they enabled him anyway because it presented them with the best way to gain votes to regain the majority in congress. They chose to ignore the lying so they could achieve their goal of gaining a majority.

    1. Once again Svelaz is consumed by another falsehood. He says that the laptop story was banned for one day. The New York Post was banned from Twitter for two weeks before an election. This was done during a time when many voters were submitting their ballots. Please don’t take my word for it. Taking Svelaz’s word for it should also be worthy of consideration. Rewriting history is one of his many talents.

    2. Svelaz, do you suppose that the New York Post was skeptical about the Hunter Laptop story but once they were given the thumb drive containing the laptop content they decided to run with the story? You say they were probably under pressure. Now given what we know it’s apparent that the post was correct in their assessment concerning the laptop. They had the laptop content and you didn’t. If you like I can post the forensic evidence produced by CBS concerning the authenticity of the laptop. I repeat. The New York post was banned from Twitter for two weeks prior to the election in an attempt to keep the American people from knowing information that would effect their decision about who they should vote for. Your down playing of what happened will not make it go away. Your doing so is simply dishonest. No surprise.

    3. What kind of research did you do, Svelaz? The “shady fella” went FIRST to the FBI… almost a year before the election

      1. Svelaz merely spews the most extreme left wing talking points most of which were debunked by FACTS years ago, and none of which ever made sense.

        That he echos talking points is fine. We all hopefully learn from others.

        That he never bothered to consider whether any of them made the slightest sense or have any connection to reality is a serious problem.
        It is dishonest.

        But what is new.

          1. Jeff Bezos, WaPo. Huffington Post (granted it has under gone different ownership, but still a Leftist new rag). CNN owned by Warner Bros and Discovery. I would go on, but you can research the information yourself. Took me a 30second search. But, doing searches might just be too far of a task for you.
            And Costco Chicken, I am not Estovir.
            Learn to read.

            1. Estovir, I only see one name here. You can’t name more than one. What’s more, Jeff Bezos is notoriously anti-union. That doesn’t sound ‘liberal’ to me.

              1. Liberals aren’t against unions? Ask the coal miners in West Virginia. How about the iron workers who were building the oil pipeline. Domn’t forget law enforcement. Defund the cops who are unionized. When forced to choose, liberals will choose the green agenda over organized labor.

  10. Turley Represents Republican Efforts To Intimidate Social Media, Part 3

    Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, sent letters in December to five large tech companies, demanding that they detail their “collusion with the Biden administration.”

    “Big Tech is out to get conservatives, and is increasingly willing to undermine First Amendment values by complying with the Biden administration’s directives that suppress freedom of speech online,” Jordan wrote in the letters, which were sent to the executives of Facebook parent company Meta, Google, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post). The accusations threaten to unravel nearly a decade of investment in people and policies intended to root out violence and falsehoods online — a powerful partisan attack on Silicon Valley, even as Biden calls for unity to take on Big Tech.

Leave a Reply