The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not having the evidence to back up your claims doesn't make them lies - it just makes him a poorly prepared interviewer.
And it could be argued that was part of the reason for an offer of an interview but only giving something like 20 minutes notice.

A good planned interview will often take hours of prep beforehand to make sure that you've got both the questions and information to hand and memorised.
 
Elon Musk: Twitter owner changes BBC account's 'government funded' label
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65248554


Quite surprised he changed it to be honest as the BBC is IMO clearly a governement-funded organisation paid for via a manadatory and legally enforced tax.

Publicly funded implies we have some level of say in how the organisation is run and/or the choice as to whether to pay for and support the channel which we clearly dont!

He said he follows the BBC and he doesn't typically give any interviews so regardless of the BBC interviewers performance being poor this is probably Elon Musk favouritism that the event and change happened at all.

Not that the labelling was in any way quality in the first place but he doesn't care to hear something is rubbish from sources he doesn't like.

Whims of the owner strike again.
 
Did that bbc journalist not bring this up when Elon said what hate speach

To be fair, I hear one of the biggest rules of journalists is to not become the news, and Elon clearly wasn't going to address to concerns and instead tried to make it about the journo, so moving on was the right choice. Who knows if the journo had this to ask, but Elon wouldn't have addressed it any way.
 
Idiots ? lol why so angry at Trump supporters....this is why people say you lot foam at the mouth, so much anger and rage always.
Also every little helps since the majority of the time the better financed candidate wins.

S9MQgqp.jpeg

I suspect as is often the way with these sorts of thing it was not being better funded that specifically wins it, but being seen to be winning makes those that want their man to win open up their wallets when its likely they will win. Backing a horse thats already in the lead so to speak.
I know many candidates will fall out early if they don't secure good funding as they know they will likely not win.
They work really hard to keep funding coming in in America over many months where things like TV air time are important, so losing momentum and funding would make it likely that (s)he who can simply spend most will stand most chance of winning, they do talk of momentum in these things.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom