Elon Musk caused a flurry on social media after the tech CEO posted a meme mocking CNN’s concerns about free speech on Twitter.
Musk posted a picture of CNN’s Don Lemon on Monday, alongside a satirical chyron that read "Elon Musk could threaten free speech on Twitter by allowing people to speak freely."
Some Twitter users were confused about whether the meme was from an actual CNN broadcast. The image is originally from Geniuses Times, a satirical website that describes itself as "the most reliable source of fake news in the planet."
Nevertheless, Musk’s post prompted a wide range of responses, from conservative praise to liberal meltdowns.
ELON MUSK TROLLS CRITICS WITH NEW 'STAY AT WORK' MERCHANDISE, FOLLOWING 'WOKE' DISCOVERY
Ronald Brownstein, a senior editor at The Atlantic, claimed that Musk was simply repackaging hate speech as free speech to empower extremism on the far right.
"Simple equation: Musk repackages hate speech racism anti-semitism homophobia and far-right intimidation as ‘free speech’ & any effort to hold him accountable for injecting it into US society as the ‘woke mob.’ On both ends, same goal: amplifying & empowering far-right extremists," he tweeted.
Meanwhile, The Jewish Voice, a news and opinion site dedicated to promoting classical Judaism, asserted that Don Lemon’s continued presence on CNN would ensure most Americans would click off the channel.
"How ridiculous can it get?" author James Arthur Ray chimed in.
"I’ve always said what I want and always will speak from heart," actor and comedian Tommy Chong tweeted.
MSNBC’S CHRIS HAYES FRETS HIS ‘WORST FEARS' HAVE BEEN REALIZED SINCE MUSK ACQUIRED TWITTER
Morten Øverbye, a tech entrepreneur and former managing editor of CNN Norway, slammed Musk for appearing to float his own rule to label parody.
"Just 17 days ago, Musk made up a new rule saying accounts engaged in parody must include ‘parody’ in their name," he said.
Musk said on November 10 that accounts engaged in parody must include the word "parody" in their actual name, not just their bio.
Musk’s criticism of CNN and Lemon comes days after the network anchor attempted to fact-check the Twitter owner, claiming that context was needed after Musk posted a tweet calling the "Hands up, don’t shoot" myth "made up."
ELON MUSK SWIPES ANOTHER NEWS OUTLET FOR 'MISINFORMATION,' AFTER STRIKING DOWN 'FLAT WRONG' REPORTS YESTERDAY
The phrase originally stemmed from Michael Brown’s death in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, when he was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson. Soon after, it became a rallying cry for racial justice protests, but the Obama administration’s Department of Justice concluded that Brown did not raise his arms to surrender before his death.
Lemon admitted that the DOJ report "cast doubt" on the narrative about Brown’s death, but also noted that "some said" Brown did attempt to surrender.
Musk has previously spoken out against the liberal media network.
Musk sat down last December with The Babylon Bee, a satirical website that recently had its Twitter account reinstated. During a discussion about "pointless" companies that "shouldn’t exist," a co-host joked they did not feel qualified to interview Musk.
"You can be on CNN right now," co-host Kyle Mann quipped.
"I’m not perverted enough, I guess," Musk responded, likely referencing a satirical Bee headline, as well as recent allegations of sexual misconduct at CNN.
17 notes
·
View notes
it's so funny seeing the negative fan reactions to Jax being even more of an asshole than he was in episode 1. like first of all, how can you not enjoy his dickhead antics and growing frustrations at the things that aren't allowing him to be a dickhead 100% of the time. i think it's really entertaining to watch him be a complete jackass to everything and everyone! and second of all, i feel like this is an effect of twitter fandom kiddies always praising a character who's a perfect angel or a "bad boy but he's bad in a good way..." character and deeming characters "immoral" as soon as they do something bad. as soon as that character they attached themselves to isn't what they thought they were, they get super mad about it, even though Jax hasn't really changed at all since episode 1. it's like seeing Jax have more opportunities to be an utterly selfish and destructive asshole put them off from the character entirely because "ohh he's mean now". it's so weird. like god forbid a character has flaws or does objectively horrible things that makes them more entertaining /sarc.
it's kinda like the whole discourse surrounding Pomni "abandoning" Ragatha in the pilot. a lot of people were deeming Pomni to be a terrible character because she did something that could be perceived as "morally incorrect" when 1. she was scared and confused out of her mind and practically in survival mode the entire time she was there, 2. she literally just met Ragatha a while ago and wasn't in the right place to properly prioritise anything but her own survival, and 3. characters are allowed to do """immoral""" things because it's interesting, it makes them more complex and it drives the plot. oh yeah, and they're not real!!! they can't hurt anyone!!! it's so confusing how people will see a character with flaws and then get so enraged about how immoral they are, while completely missing the point as to why a character has flaws in the first place.
i just find it funny how people saw Jax in the first episode, visualised a bad boy version of him in their heads and then got super mad when he was even meaner deliberately in the second one and isn't exactly what they wanted him to be. like you guys just pulled a full 180 and went from loving him to despising him in and instant. characters will have something deserving of a character arc and twitter fandom kiddies will become livid about it.
by the way, i thought Jax being even more of an asshole shined a brighter light on his troubled nature. like,,, to me it seems Jax's asshole-ish attitude is kind of a mask for deeper insecurities, especially when you see his face soften during Kaufmo's funeral, before quickly replacing it with anger and walking away. i think he's grappling with some heavy shit and trying to hide it behind a troublemaker attitude and constantly causing chaos and destruction to distract himself. i think that's why he got so angry and frustrated during the second episode, because he couldn't always have his way. he's definitely hiding something. whether it has something to do with Kaufmo, his situation or both, i wanna see what happens and what's going on with him.
personally, i want Jax to get worse, because it would be a very interesting look at how he deals with the circus compared to everyone else. i want him to get so aggressive and asshole-ish that he does something he deeply regrets (in reference to what a tweet from Gooseworx teases). to me, the biggest allure of TADC is the way the characters react to what's going on around them. each character has such a different way of coping with everything and i think Jax's way of coping, desiring chaos and death and destruction, would be an interesting look into who he is as a character. i want his harmful coping skills to drive him to a breaking point because hell yeah, character development!!! i want to see what makes the asshole into something closer to not really being as much of an asshole as he started out as.
79 notes
·
View notes
i cld be like. wrong here but i thought gortash didnt have a canon race or ethnicity? beyond being coded as turkish but even then the whiteness of turkish ppl is debated. super shitty and questionable that ppl are just throwing around racism accusations over reasonable things 2 hate his character for but it seems suspicious as hell that larian would make him one of the worst villains and also make him even remotely ethnic looking you feel me? same with cazador and saverok and the gur. lots of choices they made with their villains are questionable at best and bigoted at worst.
so for me, he doesn't read being coded any race (though I know people have pointed out his feature can be liked to turkish men or arabic men (ive personally never seen this but posts i rebloged talking about this have).
I can't imagine him as anything but white simply because I'm not painting a slaver/tryant as a man of color. Cazador's og design was kara-tur (very obvious racist chinese dnd shit) and he still does have coded features.
I mean maybe he doesnt have a canon race but like still c'mon its fucking stupid to make him a brown man. I can totally correct the post if that leap bothers ppl that much but my logic still stands. Larian is like every other company and does shit for money lets be very clear.
so yeah to me hes a white guy and looks like a white guy with a tan (bc there are literally ppl in my white bio family that look like him so the turkish coding is ??? to me, it's better to regard that to turkish person bc i dont know enough of about turkish culture to say anything but larian/dnd as whole has a lot of orientialism going on)
this dude isntantly reminded me of fucking simon cowell. Also idk if this like agreeing that he shouldnt be depicted as brown or what but look at the previous posts on my blog they can explain this better.
I'm just sick of people dick riding the most abusive cunts they possibly can find in every media and I was angry posting. But ur right im kinda doin what theyre doing by saying hes explicitly white but i'd honestly rather that then a post saying hes explicitly brown (or as another person put it "could be brown if u squint")
I admit i was just really mad and went a lil sicko mode ( my bad i did tag it in the tag lol)
but anyways, hes a white dude until proven else wise TO ME.
5 notes
·
View notes
Okay so the thing that bothers me about this professor at yale in “incredible sinking lorelais” is like….what are you mad about? what point are you trying to prove? Like, as an educator in liberal arts and humanities, shouldn’t he be pleased that a student demonstrated the ability to synthesize and compare and contrast seemingly separate topics? it’s not “avoiding research” it’s being able to draw connections, if it’s well supported, then why would that be a bad thing? like, that’s the critical analytical thinking that the ivies should be all about promoting? but no? you gotta be rude bc she didn’t cite an article from your journal? fuck off.
7 notes
·
View notes