A potent new painkiller hit the US market this week, despite warnings from top experts that the drug may deliver a deadly setback in America's battle with opioid addiction. Zohydro ER can contain 10 times the amount of hydrocodone as the most popular…
Stories Chosen For You
Twitter CEO Elon Musk on Monday tried to shame Apple into giving his company more money -- but he wound up getting roundly mocked by many of his own followers.
Musk, whose chaotic tenure as CEO of Twitter has seen both mass layoffs and an exodus of advertisers, sent out a tweet on Monday afternoon in which he accused Apple of being against the First Amendment for not giving his company more money.
"Apple has mostly stopped advertising on Twitter," he wrote. "Do they hate free speech in America?"
However, as many of Musk's followers pointed out, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution does not compel private entities to subsidize other people's speech through advertising. Rather, it guarantees that the government shall not arrest or criminally charge anyone for the simple act of non-violent speech.
"Let's try this: First Amendment applies to actions by federal, state, local governments not privately owned entities like Twitter," commented former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele in response to Musk's tweet. "Apple may not like the tenor of the speech on this platform since you bought it and is free to go elsewhere."
Other of Musk's followers questioned the wisdom of any business strategy that involves trying to shame the people whose advertising dollars you need to keep your enterprise running.
"Trying to shame them will definitely fix it," joked USA Today sports columnist Dan Wolken.
Check out some other reactions below.
\u201cNew definition of "free speech": paying to advertise on Elon Musk's personal platform!\n\nI continue to be amazed at Musk's strategy of insulting and demeaning Twitter employees, users, and advertisers. This will make for quite the HBS Case Study in years to come.\u201d— Max Boot \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Max Boot \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1669660072
\u201cI work in Comms & PR & marketing and everyone I know in that industry is having their clients pull and cut their Twitter advertising budgets because nobody wants to waste their money on an app owned by the laughing stock of the world.\u201d— Arnesa Bulju\u0161mi\u0107-Kustura (@Arnesa Bulju\u0161mi\u0107-Kustura) 1669660046
\u201capple: *trying to sell as many iphones as humanly possible*\nelon: why do you not want to be associated with my nazi frog meme friends? does this frighten you?\u201d— Oliver Willis (@Oliver Willis) 1669658892
\u201cMy wife left me. Does she hate free speech in America?\u201d— southpaw (@southpaw) 1669658795
\u201cNot subsidizing speech you find offensive and valueless does not mean you hate free speech.\u201d— James Surowiecki (@James Surowiecki) 1669658565
\u201cI\u2019m sure this\u2019ll work to bring \u2018em back\u201d— farhad manjoo (@farhad manjoo) 1669658526
\u201cThis makes no sense.\n\nNot buying clothes from @Gap doesn't mean you're a nudist.\nNot buying groceries at @WholeFoods doesn't mean you're on a food strike.\nTwitter is one of many media platforms advertisers can choose to do business with.\u201d— Stephanie Ruhle (@Stephanie Ruhle) 1669658456
\u201cI realize this is a difficult concept, but there's literally *nothing* about "free speech" that *requires* a private corporation to advertise on platforms amplifying messages with which they disagree.\n\nIf free speech is anything, it's the right of that corporation to *not* do so.\u201d— Steve Vladeck (@Steve Vladeck) 1669659049
\u201cA private corporation's decision to advertise (or not) on a given social media platform is an exercise of free speech. So are Musk's/Twitter's moderation decisions. If Twitter wants to be more like Gab, it can be! But other free citizens get to choose their level of participation\u201d— David French (@David French) 1669659182
\u201cWhen I said Elon Musk and fans' conception of free speech\u2014indeed, much of the right-wing conception of free speech in America today\u2014includes things like "websites have to widely disseminate whatever I say" and "people have to pay me money no matter what I do," I wasn't kidding.\u201d— Nicholas Grossman (@Nicholas Grossman) 1669659360
A Republican senator broke ranks with former President Donald Trump over his associations with white nationalists and anti-Semites.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who was among only seven GOP senators who voted to convict Trump in his second impeachment trial, condemned the former president for sitting down to dinner last week at Mar-a-Lago with antisemitic rapper Kanye West and neo-Nazi podcaster Nick Fuentes.
"President Trump hosting racist anti-Semites for dinner encourages other racist antisemites," Cassidy tweeted. "These attitudes are immoral and should not be entertained. This is not the Republican Party."
Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and former New Jersey governor Chris Christie each spoke out against Trump's judgement for hosting the pair at his private resort, but Cassidy appears to be the first currently serving GOP lawmaker to condemn the meeting.
\u201cPresident Trump hosting racist antisemites for dinner encourages other racist antisemites. These attitudes are immoral and should not be entertained. This is not the Republican Party.\u201d— U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (@U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D.) 1669656342
An Arizona voter warned the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors that they could face the death penalty or a violent revolution due to perceived problems with the 2022 midterm elections.
Prior to certifying the 2022 election on Monday, the county Board of Supervisors listened to testimony from angry voters claiming the election had been stolen from some Republican candidates.
A woman named Kathy Roscoe told the supervisors that she came to the hearing "to get an up close and personal look at the seven traitors to the United States Constitution."
"I will not repeat your election crimes," Rosco said. "I will just say, not certifying the machines constitutes a form of interference and in case no one has enlightened you people, interference in an election in the United States of America, Mr. Gates, is a capital offense; it's considered treason punishable by the death penalty!"
The woman demanded a "new 2022 state election not run by the people at this desk."
"The voting booth is supposed to be a time for a peaceful revolution," she added. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution necessary."
Watch the video below or at this link.