Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla, stated on Thursday that he had made a bid to acquire Twitter for $43 billion. He said that the decision will allow him to adjust the platform to encourage greater “free expression.”
“I invested in Twitter because I think in its propensity to be the venue for free expression throughout the world, and I think free speech is a social requirement for a working democracy,” said the Tesla and SpaceX billionaire in a filing.
JUST IN – Elon Musk has made an offer to buy Twitter and says the platform needs to be transformed into a private business to thrive again. pic.twitter.com/pXvFnzXSm5
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) April 14, 2022
However, after placing my investment, I’ve realized that the firm, in its recent configuration, would neither prosper nor serve this societal necessity. It’s unclear how this strategy will work out, though there is a more basic question to consider: what does Elon Musk consider free speech to be, and who is violating it?
With governments throughout the world planning crackdowns on online media, there’s a dynamic interaction between differing conceptions of what should be permitted online. Despite his broad pronouncement, Musk appears to be almost solely focused on the much narrower issue of Twitter’s own internal regulations.
To talk frankly, a Twitter official on the health team, which works on maintaining Twitter a safe, user-friendly area, consented to speak with TIME on the condition of anonymity.
Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal is attempting to calm staff concerns in the aftermath of Elon Musk’s aggressive $43 billion acquisition bid for the social media business.
According to two employees in attendance, Agrawal stated in the all meeting on Thursday that Twitter’s board is reviewing Musk’s offer and therefore will act in the best interests of shareholders of the company.
Agrawal ignored an employee’s suggestion that Musk’s aggressive purchase proposal resembled a hostage situation.
Many people were disappointed after the meeting, claiming that they were kept in the dark about what was actually going on and that a Musk-owned Twitter represented a nightmare scenario for others, given Musk’s lengthy history as a volatile corporate leader.
