Dem State Sen. Crosses Party Lines to Oppose El-Sayed, Mehdi Hasan Demands She...
Islamic Convert Who Plotted to Bomb NY Capitol Building’s Original Target Was the...
Prosecutor Reveals Karmelo Anthony Fantasized About Stabbing Someone and Licking Blood Off...
Time to Clutch the Pearls: Jake Tapper Is BIG MAD at Pete Hegseth...
Golden State Fleece: Newsom Bravely Bears the ‘Grief’ for Taxpayer-Funded Illegal Alien He...
Talarico, Desperate for Black Votes, Invents a Brand-New Legal Standard for Killer Karmelo...
SHOCKING! You'll Never Guess Where the NYC DSA Chair Lives ... and Who...
Newsom Got Caught Thinking Nobody Would Notice What He Let Slip
Bill Melugin Takes Dem Staffer APART in Back and Forth Over How Dumb...
Journo Luke Rosiak Warned His Fairfax Neighbors About Murder on NextDoor (Guess What...
Mike Rogers Just Seriously One-Upped Abdul El-Sayed at His Press Conference and OH...
Monica Crowley Used Eric Swalwell's Poorly Aging Words Against Him and He REALLY...
Independent Women's Voice Shows What a DSA Future Would REALLY Look Like in...
Democrats Declare ‘Blue Wave’ ... After Sweeping Their Own Primaries and X Has...
Uh Oh! Looks Like Eric Swalwell's Troubles Just Got Worse

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement