3.9k Share this

So much for saving the planet, eh? When Elon Musk used his superpowers to expand the electric-vehicle market and pressure other automakers into investing in them, Musk was cool enough to get a guest-hosting gig on SNL. Less than a year later, Axios now describes him as a “movie supervillain” for, um … buying Twitter. Or at least trying to do so.

Talk about meltdowns:

Why it matters: The world’s richest man — someone who used to be compared to Marvel’s Iron Man — is increasingly behaving like a movie supervillain, commanding seemingly unlimited resources with which to finance his mischief-making.

The big picture: Elon Musk has decided he wants to take Twitter private at $54.20 per share, assuming he can get “anticipated financing” in place.

In a 138-word offer letter to Twitter board chair Bret Taylor that includes the words “I” or “my” 11 different times, Musk writes that “Twitter has extraordinary potential. I will unlock it.”

Axios isn’t the only one panicking at the thought of a billionaire buying out other billionaires. Our pals at Twitchy have at least two threads running on the reaction from blue-check-certified media professionals who have invoked the Weimar Republic along with government seizure of private capital in order to, er, protect liberty. Or something. Here are a couple of highlowlights:

All of this ignores the fact that Twitter has been controlled by billionaires for years already. So has Facebook, for that matter, and Google/Alphabet, and Yahoo before that. How about the Washington Post, which got acquired by superbillionaire Jeff Bezos, including all of its news reporting functions? Furthermore, the social-media billionaires spent the last few years actively impeding free speech and news reporting rather than encouraging free and open debate. Where was all the rending of garments and gnashing of teeth over that, and all of the apocalyptic nonsense of the last few hours?

There’s actually an answer for that, Before we get to it, let’s lead up to the point with this trenchant observation from Axios. Why will this corporate takeover will get waaaaayyyy more coverage than others? Because it’s personal to journalists:

You’re going to hear much more about this bid than you would about a normal proposed M&A transaction, in large part because Twitter is where journalists congregate and do a lot of their work, and they really don’t want to be working in Elon Musk’s private playpen.

That’s part of the reason, but not all of it. The full answer is that these same figures who never bothered to object much to the status quo of social-media control liked the environment that those billionaires created. Those billionaires, they discovered, were malleable and could be either convinced or manipulated into imposing the speech codes preferred by these journalists. Musk, on the other hand, wants to buy Twitter and take it private for the express purpose of thumbing his nose at such pressure — and their ability to control narratives will suffer as a result.

That’s why we will “much more about this bid than you would about a normal proposed M&A transaction.” And that’s why the coverage and the commentary will all paint Musk as some sort of Syndrome or Vector, in hopes of amassing enough capital — political and financial — to thwart his buyout. Assuming, of course, that Musk actually can pull this buyout off.

And all of this will tend to overshadow some real concerns about media consolidation that would not just apply to Twitter, but also to the outlets that employ many of those setting their hair on fire over Musk. It’s not unfair to ask what the impact of having the world’s richest man take full control of a social media outlet with Twitter’s reach. It’s also not unfair to ask what the impact has been of Jeff Bezos acquiring the Washington Post, Carlos Slim taking a big chunk of the New York Times, or the M&A of Hollywood studios, acquisitions by Viacom, Comcast, and so on. In terms of real impact on reporting, Musk’s buyout of Twitter would pale in comparison to real media consolidation over the last couple of decades.

And yet the journalists that operate in that sphere barely comment on those concerns while treating Musk as a “movie supervillain.” Watch the media spaces to see how far the conformity of that characterization will spread over the next few days in order to grasp just what the real problem in media actually is.

Source: This post first appeared on HotAir

3.9k Share this
You May Also Like

Blumenthal Voted for Intel Subsidy After His Family Bought $250K in Stock

Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection Chairman Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) voted for legislation that…

Democrats, Corporate Media Politically Bungle Another School Shooting

Watching Democrats and the corporate media blow themselves up in the wake…

Biden’s DHS Using Border Wall Funds to Conduct ‘Environmental Planning’

President Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is spending border wall…

German girl, 15, reveals Texas gunman told her he was going to shoot up elementary school

A 15-year-old German girl has revealed the twisted Texas gunman told her…

Alec Baldwin reveals his beloved mom Carol has passed away at 92 in her hometown of Syracuse

Alec Baldwin reveals his beloved mom Carol has passed away at 92…

Britons prepare for Queen’s Platinum Jubilee and mark her 70 years on the throne

Enthusiastic Brits are already getting ready to celebrate the Queen‘s Platinum Jubilee…

Johnny Depp is back on the stand as he recounts blowout fights with Amber Heard

Johnny Depp was back in witness box Wednesday morning to answer questions…

Meghan Markle’s sister accuses her sibling of ‘negligence’ with no contact with estranged dad Thomas

Meghan Markle’s estranged sister has begged her to stop ‘watching and doing…