MASTER Class! AG Hamilton SCHOOLS WaPo Hack Playing Race Card to Defend Somali...
Tommy Lee Jones's Daughter Found Dead on New Year's Day, She Was 34
Call to Activism's Claim About Jack Smith Footage Proves NOBODY Grifts Better Than...
Babylon Bee Editor Thanks Snopes for Debunking This Believable Story About Tim Walz's...
PANIC! Man Tries Enrolling His Kid at Quality 'Learing 'Center and BAHAHA, This...
Wait, Is This Video to Promote Communists As Blue-Collar Working People for Real?
Mike Davis ENDS Eric Swalwell (Assist from Harmeet Dhillon) for Threatening to Charge...
Brit Hume Shares DAMNING Post That Explains What Zohran Mamdani's 'Warmth of Collectivism'...
'Mamdani Press Account' Says 'in No Way Was This a Nazi Salute' and...
THIS! NYT Best Selling Author Takes NPR's Front Page Smearing Nick Shirley APART...
Jack Smith (Yes, THAT Jack Smith) Just EVISCERATED Nancy Pelosi's J6 Committee (Especially...
Catherine Herridge Exposes How CBS Suppressed the Hunter Biden Laptop Story (and SO...
Embrace the SUCK! Mamdani Voters Get a Taste of What Communism REALLY Looks...
Singer Chappell Roan Doesn’t Know Anybody With Children Who’s Happy
High Marx: New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani Says Bernie Sanders Is the Leader...

New Scientist addresses the dangers of free speech, says 'it is a fallacy that we should be able to say whatever we want to whomever we want'

The way so many people on the Left talk about him, you’d think Elon Musk posed some kind of existential threat to everything Americans hold dear.

When he announced his intentions to buy Twitter, the lefty meltdowns were swift and many. As an apparent free speech absolutist, Musk would potentially turn Twitter into a platform where people could say whatever they want to whomever they want. And that would not only be scary, but downright anti-science!

Advertisement

We guess. New Scientist, the self-appointed “best place to find out what’s new in science,” has a new piece by scifi and nonfiction writer Annalee Newitz all about the dangers of believing that freedom of speech is about free speech:

https://twitter.com/newscientist/status/1529856187595898880

Alas, the article is behind a paywall. So much for free speech, huh? Oh well. Between the tweet and the first couple of paragraphs, New Scientist has given us enough to work with:

LAST month, Elon Musk, the richest person in the world, was about to buy Twitter. He lined up financing for the bonkers $44 billion price tag. Then, he backed off. At the time of writing, he has whiplashed to saying the deal is “not out of the question” if the price comes down.

The whole sequence of events was corporate melodrama at its finest, but it was also an object lesson in how a myth unique to the US about free speech has shaped Silicon Valley media companies.

Fair question.

Sounds like New Scientist isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

Old Scientist would be pretty appalled right now.

Advertisement

Science owes a great deal to freedom of speech.

And New Scientist owes us an apology for subjecting us to such a stupid take.

The idea that we should ever take New Scientist seriously going forward is a fallacy.

We’ll close with the first tweet in a thread you’ll want to read. This thread is a lot more insightful than anything you’re going to find in New Scientist:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos