Is Time’s Article Criticizing Musk’s Free Speech Stance Satire Or Journalism?

These days, it’s very difficult to distinguish between satire and reality, and that is due chiefly to articles like this one by Time, which is absolutely off the charts in ignorance and hypocrisy.

.@CharlotteAlter: “Freedom of speech” has become a paramount concern of the techno-moral universe.

But “free speech” in the 21st century means something very different than it did in the 18th, when the Founders enshrined it in the Constitution https://t.co/UKjEfuWiJg

— TIME (@TIME) April 29, 2022

It starts out by once again rehashing one of the left’s current favorite narratives on the subject, feigning outrage that Musk chose to spend his fortune purchasing a social media platform rather than solving all the ills of the world like homelessness, hunger, education, etc. As though there aren’t a ton of other billionaires out there who are likewise choosing not to spend their billions solving all the ills of the world, but rather making purchases and investments which either make them money or give them power. Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and George Soros, to name three of the top of my head. But, of course, they have to pretend to be morally outraged that Twitter is “worth more (to him, at least) than educating every child in nearly 50 countries…”

Here’s another bit I love, where the author quotes a 2010 Twitter board member- “Goldman says it’s “naive” to believe that Musk can throw out Twitter’s guardrails without degrading the platform. “To say you’re just going to allow for any type of abuse or harassment,” he says, “is an inherently anti-speech position, because you’re going to drive out a set of users who would use your product but no longer feel safe.””

Oh, you mean like how the current Twitter is inherently anti-speech because they’ve censored, removed, or driven out an absolutely massive demographic of users representing almost half of the country (conservatives) who were actively trying to use the product but were overtly targeted and hindered? Just like that? The hypocrisy is astounding, unless they’re legitimately unaware, in which case the ignorance is astounding.

Or there’s the bit where the author essentially says that tech people like Musk can’t grasp the reality of free speech, or language generally, because they haven’t been educated like journalists- “a lack of a humanities education might make them less attuned to the social and political nuances of speech.” As though their studying to become partisan propagandists somehow gives them a greater understanding of free speech rights than all the other deplorables.Or how about the bit where the author actually tries to insinuate that this is a gender and race issue about which white men disproportionately care, with an underlying implication of unreasonability because men, especially straight white ones like Elon Musk, are public enemy number 1. The author twice refers to gender and race, quoting one person saying that “tech rhetoric around free speech has become an obsession of the mostly white, male members of the tech elite,” and quoting another saying “free speech seems to be much more of an obsession among men.” Because they simply have to make everything about race and gender these days.

It’s almost like they threw every talking point they had at it, just to see what would stick. The Babylon Bee could have written this, and I would have marveled at the genius of satire for pointing out blatant hypocrisy and ignorance on so many fronts regarding a single issue. But this isn’t satire. This is what they call “journalism.”