Probably Brazil can live without Twitter better than Twitter without Brazil
Yep.
Meta's WhatsApp is the critical social media app in Brazil (and most large countries excluding US, Canada, China, Thailand, SK, JP, and Vietnam)
That's not the case with X. Isn't like X (or previously Twitter) ever had the amount of users that WhatsApp have in Brazil.
If I recall, X have 20 million monthly active users, and yet it was the 4 or 5 country where X had most users.
But for Brazil size, this is very ridiculous, WhatsApp have 170 million users in Brazil.
This just shows how Twitter/X is small compared to other networks. It was always a small social network with relevant people.
Pretty difficult to pick a lane it seems.
Brazil made it pretty clear what they wanted, but Musk had some petty beef with the Brazilian judge in charge of the operation (cue the ai image he posted of that judge behind bars), and so refused to comply.
I suspect the lack of full throated public support from Brazilians for Musk is telling. They may not fully agree with the ruling but they also don't think Musk is playing altruistically.
Can you say "cisgender" on Twitter now, or is it still banned?
Now that's an oxymoron.
Reality, Musk's X-Twitter free speech policy is about his personal tastes.[1] [2]
My personal taste, I cannot support anyone that willfully pushes miss-information nor narratives that detract words and statements from their actual meanings. Miss-information, tell a lie long enough people will believe it. This how conversion therapy works and the movie "But I'm a Cheerleader" highlights this farce.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2024/08/29/x-caught-blocking-links-to...
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2023/07/02/elon-mus...
What is Information and what is Miss-information?
Example: "Vaccines make people autistic." Is that information or miss-information? If vaccines did make people autistic then anyone who was given a vaccine would be autistic. This means all US military personal are autistic because they must be vaccinated to remain in service. Yet 100% of them are not autistic, nor are all the individuals that received a cold, flu, and COVID vaccines.
What about a politician making the statement, "I know more about the Middle East than anyone else.". Wouldn't know nuances about cultural slang and difference in regional dialects be a requirement to make that statement true? Wouldn't that persona also need to know Arabic and Hebrew with the ability to pick truthful declarations over sarcasm? With more context, that statement was made by a US politician.
Let's re-phrase that statement, "I know more about computers than anyone else.", which defines no one in the world! Even the smartest people that know a lot about computers cannot possibly know everything.
How would you decided if "Vaccines make people autistic.", that a politician is truthful when saying "I know more about the Middle East than anyone else.", and the person next to you saying "I know more about computers than anyone else." are information or miss-information?
To re-phrase my personal statement, I do not respect those that push miss-information.
The law is very clear, and X was very clearly violating it. Multiple laws, even, as it's also legally required to have a representative in the company.
And the specific freedom to defend and spread nazi speak. Which, in Brazil, in paper is a crime.
It's never freedom of speech with a goal other than actively desiring and justifying to hurt others, of belittling and bullying others.
Quite amusing.
Our constitution is ABSOLUTELY clear on this matter.
> Any and all censorship of a political, ideological and artistic nature is forbidden
1. The accounts that this judge is after were engaging in political speech.
2. A government official ordering these political accounts blocked and their political posts deleted matches the "any and all censorship of political nature" clause.
3. The order is therefore unconstitutional.
As you can see, it's a very simple argument. There should have never have been an order for Musk to defy to begin with.
The problem is that the constitution doesn't matter. He's a judge of the supreme court. There's no court above him to countermand him. So he does whatever he wants. It doesn't matter what the law says because the truth is whatever he writes on a piece of paper becomes law.
I find it very hard to entertain the idea that there are people out there in this day and age who still believe that the likes of Elon Musk supports free speech, even remotely.
He has a track record of arbitrarily banning users from Twitter for asking him inconvenient answers, and he supported authoritarian governments banning opposition parties from national elections with bullshit excuses like either all posts or some posts would be "throttled" (aka censored) in countries like Turkey, and given the choice he prefered to censor some posts/users instead of all posts/users.
But when a country with a leftist government asked Twitter to appoint a legal representative to process lawful requests regarding people planning a right-wing coup, Elon Musk went to the extreme of even pulling all corporate presence from the country to avoid complying.
Who still believes this is a free speech issue?