Elon Musk is destroying Twitter and it’s stock price

Author: IwantRooseveltagain

Posts

Total: 64
Topic's author
#1
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
The idiot Elon Musk has no idea what he is talking about when he chose to label NPR as “state-affiliated media” and then changed to “government-funded media”.  In a BBC interview posted online Wednesday, Musk suggested he may further change the label to "publicly funded."

He is clueless and reckless.

The truth is NPR is a private, nonprofit company with editorial independence. It receives less than 1 percent of its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

#2
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
If you are going to quote something g so put of context at least bluff your way through it.  NPR, CBC, BBC, and Australia  are all state machines

I founs that in the fiscal year 2020, NPR's revenue was approximately $258 million. Of this amount, about 35% came from public radio stations and program fees, 28% from corporate sponsorships, and 19% from foundations and philanthropic gifts. The remaining 18% came from other sources, including individual donations and government grants.  So to say it is 1% is fake news.   See what I did there :)
Topic's author
#3
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
I founs that in the fiscal year 2020, 
You founs? Where did you founs?

The remaining 18% came from other sources, including individual donations and government grants. So to say it is 1% is fake news. 
That’s a lie. The government grants are 1% of there $300 million operating budget, or 3 million dollars.

#4
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
fFrst I apologize for the typo.   My bad.  

Second, your source is about direct federal government funding and not all public funding.  

Topic's author
#5
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
Second, your source is about direct federal government funding and not all public funding.  
So now you’re concerned about state and local money too? That doesn’t sound like Big Government controlling the media.

This is what your source says:

“On average, less than 1% of NPR's annual operating budget comes in the form of grants from CPB and federal agencies and departments”

Which is exactly what I wrote in the first post so thank you for confirming this fact.

If you are going to quote something g so put of context at least bluff your way through it.
This must be another typo but what is “so put (out) of context? 1% of their funding comes from the big bad federal government. Maybe 4% comes directly and indirectly from state and local government. I think you and Elon Musk both have your heads up your ass. Try that.
#6
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
Taxpayer money going into a media corporation should be a concern for all.  The way to do it is set up a boars like the FAA or NTSB finance it, and let it finance the Media outlets.  This is a topic I find incredibly difficult to talk about in a professional manner.    In part because the  governmental intrusion on all types of media is endemic in nature.  Is this not a problem for you?
Topic's author
#7
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
Taxpayer money going into a media corporation should be a concern for all.
No, taxpayers are the ones benefiting from PBS. The federal government subsidizes the PBS budget so they can provide programming to poor rural areas with shows like Sesame Street and TheNewsHour. Just like they subsidize poor rural areas for cable TV, internet connections, 911 emergency calls, scheduled air service, crop insurance and other help they need because they are in parts of the country where it doesn’t pay to do business.

#8
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Elon Musk is destroying Twitter and it’s stock price
  • I left Twitter the day Musk took over. 
  • Matt Taibbi, the byline under "the Twitter Files," left Twitter this week.
  • I'm fine with the Twitter self-destructing, it's continued existence isn't really of value to anybody.

Topic's author
#9
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
I agree 100%. It’s just a source for misinformation for stupid people
Topic's author
#10
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
Do you have the facts straight now? You’re welcome.
#11
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I never said there was anything wrong with it.   BTW. PBS and NPR are very different.   
Topic's author
#12
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
PBS and NPR are very different.   
How so?

“The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is an American publicly funded non-profit corporation, created in 1967 to promote and help support public broadcasting.[3] The corporation's mission is to ensure universal access to non-commercial, high-quality content and telecommunications services. It does so by distributing more than 70 percent of its funding to more than 1,400 locally owned public radio and television stations”

In 1969 CPB created PBS

IN 1970 CPB created NPR

The only difference between PBS and NPR is NPR produces and distributes content while PBS only produces.

Topic's author
#13
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
I never said there was anything wrong with it.
You said “should be a concern for all”. So not wrong, just concerning. Got it
#14
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,077
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Slainte
PBS isn't concerning for a stolen valor larper.
Topic's author
#15
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Hello Gay Parrot loser. No $100 today? Maybe they’ll call you tomorrow 
#16
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
I left Twitter the day Musk took over. 
I am surprised you're still here given how much you hate freedom of speech, given that Musk's only changes to Twitter were essentially cut down on bots and allow people to have different opinions than he does.
Topic's author
#17
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
I am surprised you're still here given how much you hate freedom of speech, given that Musk's only changes to Twitter were essentially cut down on bots and allow people to have different opinions than he does.
Is that the only changes he made? Really?

#18
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Yep other than cosmetic shit that doesn't matter. 
#19
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,077
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Stolen valor larpers got nowhere else to go.
#20
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
So if the government funds a  broadcaster, it is wrong to point that out?  You know who funds them from the private side, it is called advertisers.  

$515M is spent to fund CPB.   PBS and NPR are very difference because PBS goes after individual donors and grants.  NPR does not. 

You have not stated why labelling a fact is a problem.    I would ask you to be civil.  Sarcasm does not read well.
Topic's author
#21
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
He was talking about Oragami dum dum. You can’t get anything right, can you? That’s why you will always be a SUBSTITUTE teacher. A job anyone with a pulse can get.
Topic's author
#22
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
So if the government funds a  broadcaster, it is wrong to point that out?
They don’t fund broadcasters. You are spinning. All Republicans spin because they can’t face reality because it doesn’t align with their preconceived ideology

The only case of political influence on the non profit implicated Republicans. Because reality has a well known liberal bias.

Read the Wikipedia write up on the CPB and you will be more informed on this subject. That way you won’t be expressing concerns from a position of ignorance 

Topic's author
#23
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
Sarcasm does not read well.
Your nonsense is worthy of nothing but derision 

#24
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Hmm,   NPR and PBS are broadcastors.  The Federal Government give  $515M to CPB, which you stated are the founders of both of those organization.

Yet the government does not fund broadcasters.  How does that work?

I have no idea what your Republican comment is about. I certainly am not one.    

You dodge the question again.   You have not stated why labelling a fact is a problem. 

Your nonsense is worthy of nothing but derision 
Feel free to point out one thing that I said that even warrants such a response please.  Or do not.   
Topic's author
#25
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
The Federal Government give  $515M to CPB, which you stated are the founders of both of those organization.
Yet the government does not fund broadcasters.  How does that work?

Read the Wikipedia write up on the CPB and you’d understand why you have no clue. It will show you were the Federal money went in a recent budget.

For fiscal year 2014, its appropriation was US$445.5 million, including $500,000 in interest earned. The distribution of these funds was as follows:[8]

$222.78M for direct grants to local public television stations;
$74.63M for television programming grants;
$69.31M for direct grants to local public radio stations;
$26.67M for PBS support;
$22.84M for grants for radio programming and national program production and acquisition;
$22.25M for CPB administrative costs;
$7.00M for the Radio Program Fund.

If you want to know what you are talking about, “rather than just asking questions” you have to read.
#26
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,077
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Slainte
You dodge the question again.   You have not stated why labelling a fact is a problem. 

Stolen valor larpers are good at dodging.
#27
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON

I am surprised you're still here given how much you hate freedom of speech, given that Musk's only changes to Twitter were essentially cut down on bots
  • at this time last year, Twitter had 7500 employees.   On Jan 21, Musk claimed that he employed 2300 at Twitter, but the company's own HR has to report accurately and reports  the company has 1300 employees (with 75 on leave).  No word on whether Musk was lying or just 76% misinformed about the people he is the executive over.
    • Musk also falsely claimed that he had hundred of employees devoted to trust and safety but the actual number is less than 20 and Musk disbanded the group formed to advise Twitter regarded hate speech, harassment, child exploitation, suicide, self-harm and other problems on the platform and has not hired any employees to fulfill these rolls.  Nobody is protecting childen from Twitter since Musk took over.
      • Musk might claim to have cut down on bots but the hones answer is that he fired the people who actually managed bots.  Remember when we discovered that even though AshleyMadison.com claimed to have equal proportions of men to women, 99% of those accounts claiming to be women were in fact men at the actual proportion was 1 real live woman for every 13,404 men on the site?  Yeah, it's like that.   The honest answer is that nobody knows how crazy the bots have gone since Musk took over because nobody is counting, estimates range between 15% and 80% of users left on Twitter are bots.
    • Changed verification to a pay service.  That is, a blue check mark used to mean that Twitter has verified that the person is who they claim to be and now it only means that somebody paid Musk to say they are who they claim to be without any verification.  More children get exposed to porn by Elon Musk via this policy than all the drag queens who ever read Dr Seuss in a library.
and allow people to have different opinions than he does.
  • Musk banned a long list of reputible reporters for printing the truth about him.  Matt Taibbi is ony the latest reporter to walk away from Twitter.
  • Musk bans users who track his private jet using publicly accessible data but not any users who track other people's jets.
  • Musk has banned many disgruntled former Twitter employees without cause.
  • Say what you what about former Twitter CEOs, they had a team in place to make sure that bans weren't strictly personal vendettas.  Musk bought Twitter precisely to control public opinion about him.  Musk doesn't care about opinion that misinform or harm children, etc, Musk only acts out of personal vanity.
Real lovers of free speech also love the truth with equal fervor.  Let's face it, wylted, you despise the truth for the same reason you despise democracy- on any even playing field, you aren't bright enough to compete.  The only free speech you ever fight for is your freedom to trick your friends with falsehoods.




Topic's author
#28
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
Wait, are you saying that Prez is full of shit? Oh no, I never would of thought such a thing about this genius with a high school diploma.
#29
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
at this time last year, Twitter had 7500 employees. On Jan 21, Musk claimed that he employed 2300 at Twitter, but the company's own HR has to report accurately and reports the company has 1300 employees (with 75 on leave). No word on whether Musk was lying or just 76% misinformed about the people he is the executive over
I saw these people's tik toms. They bragged about doing 4 hours of actual work a week. Even with a drastic reduction in employees requiring them to actually work instead of collect paychecks is likely going to make up for the number. Misstating the number is not a big deal but the real number of employees is likely debatable anyway once you consider contractor's etc.

Nobody is protecting childen from Twitter since Musk took over.
The numbers I have seen recently shows that while he has increased free speech by allowing opinions he disagrees with, what most would consider hate speech has lost it's reach due to algorithm changes.

Changed verification to a pay service
Prior to Elon musk taking over there were a lot of people advertising services to verify people for $10k and more. These services are reported to have worked as well. A lot of people prior to musk who were having a lot of people pretending to be them could not get verification despite numerous requests.

Musk bans users who track his private jet using publicly accessible data but not any users who track other people's jets.
A member of the antifa organization tried to attack his child. I think it's suitable for him to protect his child from lunatics.

Musk has banned many disgruntled former Twitter employees without cause.
I haven't seen this occur and if so I wonxer what they actually said prior to bans. Company secrets etc.

Say what you what about former Twitter CEOs, they had a team in place to make sure that bans weren't strictly personal vendettas
Maybe not personal vendettas but I would consider banning based on political speech you disagree with is worse than doing it for a personal vendetta.

on any even playing field, you aren't bright enough to compete
We could legitimately set up an IQ test that we both take on a fair playing field. Maybe at a university with psychologists or something or just have some third party point us to a reliable online IQ test and we have a short time period to live stream us taking the tests.

If I lose the IQ test I will kill myself for being stupider than you, but if I win the contest you have to buy me dinner at a place of my choosing. 
#30
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
Real lovers of free speech also love the truth with equal fervor.
Absolutely not. The reason being is that truth is unknowable while freedom is a possible thing to obtain. I would fear the truth being lost more than I fear misinformation appearing, despite the fact one cannot actually tell the difference between each one