>> ELON MUSK BOUGHT TWITTER
BECAUSE HE USED TWITTER.
HE WAS INFURIATED BY TWITTER’S
EFFORT TO SILENCE PEOPLE ON THE
INTERNET.
THAT’S HOW STRONGLY HE BELIEVED
IN FREE SPEECH, HE PAID
$44 BILLION AND LOST 10S OF
MILLIONS OF CLASS DOING IT.
WHEN HE TOOK OR HE DISCOVERED
TWITTER WAS REALLY A TOOL OF THE
GLOBAL INTEL AGENCY AGENCIES TO
SPY ON PEOPLE AND ADMIT
PROPAGANDA.
HE IT IS.
>> YOU BOUGHT TWITTER FAMOUSLY,
YOU GOT A LOT OF OTHER
BUSINESSES AND A LOT GOING ON.
>> YES.
>> YOU SAID YOU BOUGHT IT
BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN SPEECH,
FREE SPEECH.
YOU’VE HAD A LOT OF HASSLE SINCE
YOU BAT IT.
IN RETROSPECT WAS IT WORTH
BUYING IT IN.
>> IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER
THIS WAS FINANCIALLY SMART.
CURRENTLY, IT IS NOT.
WE JUST REVALUED THE COMPANY AT
LESS THAN HALF THE APP PRICE.
>> DID DID YOU REALLY?
>> YES.
>> SORRY.
>> [CHUCKLE]
>> MY TIMING WAS TERRIBLE FOR
BECAUSE RIGHT BEFORE ADVERTISING
PLUMMETED.
>> YOU CAUGHT THE HIGH WATER
MARK I NOTICED.
>> YEAH.
I MUST BE A REAL GENIUS HERE.
MY TIMING IS AMAZING.
AT LEAST TWICE AS MUCH AS IT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN BOUGHT FOR.
BUT SOME THINGS ARE PRICELESS.
SO, THE, WHETHER LOSING MONEY OR
NOT THAT WAS THE SECONDARY ISSUE
COMPARED TO ENSURING THE
STRENGTH OF DEMOCRACY AND FREE
SPEECH IS THE BED ROCK OF A
FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY.
>> YES.
>> AND THE SPEECH NEEDS TO BE AS
TRANSPARENT AND TRUTHFUL AS
POSSIBLE SO WE’VE GOT A HUGE
PUSH ON TWITTER TO BE AS
TRUTHFUL AS POSSIBLE.
WE GOT THIS COMMUNITY FEATURE
WHICH IS GREAT.
>> IT IS GREAT.
>> IT IS AWESOME.
>> I SAW IT THIS MORNING.
IT WAS FAR MORE HONEST THAN THE
NEW YORK TIMES.
>> IT’S GREAT.
WE PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO
ENSURING THAT COMMUNITY NOTICE
DOES NOT GET GAMED OR HAVE
BIASES.
IT SIMPLY CARES ABOUT WHAT IS
THE MOST ACCURATE THING.
SOMETIMES TRUTH CAN BE A LITTLE
BIT ELUSIVE, BUT YOU CAN STILL
ASPIRE TO GET CLOSER TO IT.
>> YES.
>> SO, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THE
EFFECT OF COMMUNITY NOTES IS A
MORE POWERFUL THAN PEOPLE MAY
REALIZE BECAUSE ONCE PEOPLE KNOW
THEY CAN GET NOTED, YOU KNOW,
COMMUNITY NOTED ON TWITTER, THEN
THEY’LL THINK MORE CAREFULLY
ABOUT WHAT THEY SAY.
MORE LIKELY IT’S BASICALLY AN
ENCOURAGEMENT TO BE MORE
TRUTHFUL AND LESS DECEPTIVE.
>> WHEN YOU JUMPED INTO THIS AND
YOU BOUGHT IT, CLEARLY YOU
UNDERSTOOD ITS IMPORTANCE OR YOU
WOULDN’T HAVE BOUGHT IT.
>> TWITTER? YES.
>> RIGHT.
IT’S NOT THE BIGGEST, OR THE
MOST IMPORTANT OF THE SOCIAL
MEDIA COMPANIES, BUT DID YOU
UNDERSTAND THE KIND OF FEROCITY
YOU’D BE FACING FROM POWER
CENTERS IN THE COUNTRY?
>> I THOUGHT THERE WOULD
PROBABLY BE SOME NEGATIVE
REACTIONS.
[TUCKER CACKLES]
>> I’M SURE NOT PLEASE WITH IT.
BUT, UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY,
YOU KNOW, IF THE PUBLIC IS HAPPY
WITH IT, THAT’S WHAT MATTERS AND
THE PUBLIC WILL SPEAK WITH THEIR
ACTIONS.
I MEAN, IF THEY FIND TRUTH,
TWITTER TO BE USEFUL THEY WILL
USE IT MORE, IF THEY FIND IT TO
BE NOT USEFUL THEY WILL CRUISE
IT LESS.
IF THEY FIND IT TO BE THE SOURCE
OF TRUTH, I THINK THEY WILL USE
IT MORE.
THERE’S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF
ORGANIZATIONS TAT ARE USED TO
HAVING SORT OF UNGETTERRED ON
TWITTER THEY NO LONGER HAVE
THAT.
>> THE TIMES OF THEIR BADGE THIS
MORNING AND THIRTY NINE CALL
THEN YOU CALLED THEM DIARRHEA
[LAUGHTER]
>> YOU DID.
>> YES.
>> YO DESCRIBED THE TWITTER FEED
AS DIARRHEA.
>> TWITTER -- OF DIARRHEA.
>> NOT LITERALLY.
>> NO.
IT’S A METAPHOR.
[EVIL LAUGHTER]
>> BUT AN ACCURATE ONE. IF YOU
LOOK AT NEW YORK TIMES TWITTER
FEED IT’S UNARIABLE BECAUSE THEY
TWEET EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE, EVEN
THE ONES THAT ARE BORING, EVEN
THE ONES THAT DON’T MAKE IT INTO
THE PAPER.
SO ITER ARE JUST NON-STOP, A
ZILLION TWEETS A DAY WITH NO,
YOU KNOW, THEY REALLY SHOULD
JUST BE SAYING WHAT ARE THE TOP
TWEETS?
WHAT ARE THE BIG STORIES OF THE
DAY?
I DON’T KNOW, PUT OUT, LIKE, 10
OR SOMETHING.
YOU KNOW, SOME NUMBER THAT’S
MANAGEABLE AS OPPOSED TO RIGHT
NOW IF YOU WERE TO FOLLOW NY
TIMES, @ NYTIMES TWITTER YOU’RE
GOING TO GET BARRAGED WITH
HUNDREDS OF TWEETS A DAY AND
YOUR WHOLE FEED WILL BOW FILLED
WITH NY TIMES.
THIS IS SOMETHING I WOULD
RECOMMEND FOR ALL PUBLICATIONS,
WHICH IS, F, FOR YOUR PRIMARY
FEED, ONLY PUT OUT YOUR BEST
STUFF.
I THINK I KNOW A THING OR TWO
ABOUT HOW TO USE TWITTER BECAUSE
I WAS THE MOST INTERACTED WITH
ACCOUNT ON THE WHOLE SYSTEM
BEFORE THE ACQUISITION, BEFORE
THE ACQUISITION CLOSED.
I DIDN’T HAVE THE MOST NUMBER OF
FOLLOWERS, BUT I HAD THE MOST
NUMBER OF INTERACTIONS.
I CLEARLY KNOW HOW TO USE
TWITTER.
GET PEOPLES ATTENTION IS LIMITED
PUT WHAT’S THE MOST IMPORTANT
OUT THERE.
>> BECAUSE YOU AND PEOPLE LIKE
YOU DO INTERACT ON TWITTER, IT’S
OBVIOUSLY ENORMOUSLY POWER
POWERFUL IN SHAPING PUBLIC
OPINION.
IT’S A WHERE A LOT OF IDEAS AND
10S ARE OINK BAITED.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> IT’S ALSO A MAGNET FOR INTEL
ABLES AROUND THE WORLD.
>> YES.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARN
AFTER YO STARTED OPENING THE
BOOKS IS THEY WERE ASSERTING
INFLUENCE FROM WITHIN TWITTER.
>> IT WAS ABSURD.
>> DID YOU KNOW THAT GOING IN?
>> NO.
SINCE I’VE BEEN A’ HEAVY TWITTER
USER SINCE 2009, IT’S SORT OF
LIKE I’M IN THE MATRIX.
I CAN SEE THINGS, DO THINGS FEEL
RIGHT, DO THEY NOT FEEL RIGHT,
WHAT TWEETS AM I BEING SHOWN AS
RECOMMENDED?
LIKES I GET A FEEL, LIKE WHAT
ACCOUNTS ARE MAKING COMMENTS?
WHERE ARE THE COMMENTS ERIELY
SIMILAR, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT
THE ACCOUNT AND IT’S OBVIOUSLY A
FAKE PHOTO AND IT’S JUST
OBVIOUSLY A BOT CLUSTER OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
I STARTED TO GET MORE AND MORE
UNEASY ABOUT THE TWITTER
SITUATION. YN STARTED TO FEEL
LIKE SOMETHING’S SOMETHING FEELS
WRONG ABOUT THE PLATFORM.
IT SEEMED TO BE JUST DRIFTING IN
A, I COULDN’T PLACE IT EXACTLY.
JUST, I HAD A, IT FELT LIKE IT
WAS DRIFTING IN A BAD DIRECTION.
SO THEN I WAS LIKE, MY
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE BOARD AND
MANAGEMENT SEEMED TO CONFIRM MY
INTUITION ABOUT THAT.
BASICALLY, THESE GUYS DO FOUGHT
CARE ABOUT FIXING TWITTER AND I
HAD A BAD FEELING ABOUT WHERE IT
WAS HEADED BASED ON THE
CONVERSATIONS I HAD WITH THEM.
YOU KNOW I’LL TRY ACQUIRING IT
AND SEE IF ACQUIRING IT IS
POSSIBLE.
NOW, I DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH CASH
TO ACQUIRE IT SO I WOULD NEED
SUPPORT FROM OTHERS, FROM SOME
OF THE EXISTING INVESTORS, I
ALSO WOULD NEED LIKE A LOT OF
DEBT SO IT WASN’T CLEAR TO ME
WHETHER IT WOULD SUCCEED BUT I
THOUGHT I WOULD TRY.
AND, UH, ULTIMATELY IT DID
SUCCEED.
ANYWAY, HERE WE ARE.
>> WHEN YOU GOT THERE, AND ALL
OF A SUDDEN YOU OWN IT AND ALL
THE DATA ON THE SERVERS BELONG
TO YOU.
>> IT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE IN
MY VIEW, BUT YES.
>> BUT YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEY’VE
BEEN DOING.
>> YES.
>> AND YOU CAN SEE WHO’SWORKING
THERE.
YOU WERE SHOCKED TO FIND OUT
THAT VARIOUS INTEL AGENCIENS
WERE AFFECTING ITS OPERATIONS?
>> UH, THE DEGREE TO WHICH
VARIOUS GOVERNMENT AGENCIES HAD
EFFECTIVELY HAD FULL ACCESS TO
EVERYTHING THAT WAS GETTING ON
IN TWITTER BLEW MY MIND.
I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT.
>> WOULD THAT INCLUDE PEOPLE’S
DM’S.
>> YES.
YES.
THEY WERE NOT ENCRYPTED.
1 OF THE THINGS THAT WE’RE ABOUT
TO RELEASE IS THE ABILITY TO
ENCRYPT YOUR DM’S.
>> THAT’S PRETTY HEAVY DUTY
BECAUSE LOT OF WELL-KNOWN
PEOPLE, REPORTERS TALKING TO
THEIR SOURCES, GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS, THEY’RE DMING EACH
OTHER.
>> YES.
>> THE ASSUMPTION WAS OBVIOUSLY
INCORRECT WAS THAT THAT’S
PRIVATE BUT THAT WAS BEING READ
BY VARIOUS GOVERNMENTS?
>> YEAH.
THAT SEEMS -- YES.
>> SCARY.
>> YES.
IT IS.
SO, LIKE ID, WE’RE MOVING TO
HAVE THE DM’S BE OPTIONALLY
ENCRYPTED.
LIKE A LOT OF DM CONVERSATIONS
WHICH ARE JUST CHATTING ARE
FRIENDS.
>> FOR SURE.
>> NOT IMPORTANT.
THAT’S HOPEFULLY COMING OUT
LATER THIS MONTH, BUT NO LATER
THAN NEX MONTH, IS THE ABILITY TO TOGGLE INCRIMINAL POSSESSION
TO TOGGLE INCRIMINAL POSSESSION
ON OR OFF ENCRYPTION.
THEY COULD PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD
AND I COULDN’T, THAT’S THE SORT
OF GUN TO HEAD TEST IF SOMEONE
PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD, COULD I
STILL NOT SEE YOUR DM? THAT
SHOULD BE, THAT THE ABSOLUTE
TEST.
>> YES.
>> AND THAT’S HOW IT SHOULD BE,
IF YOU WANT --
>> HAVE YOU HAD COMPLAINTS FROM
VARIOUS GOVERNMENTS ABOUT DOING
THIS?
>> I HAVEN’T HAD DIRECT
COMPLAINTS TO ME.
I’VE HAD SOME INDIRECT
COMPLAINTS. YN THINK PEOPLE ARE
A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT COMPLAINING TO ME DIRECTLY IN
COMPLAINING TO ME DIRECTLY IN
CASE I TWEET ABOUT IT.
[LAUGHTER]
YOU KNOW.
THEY’RE LIKE UH-OH.
THEY TRY TO BE MORE ROUND ABOUT
THAN THAT.
IF I GOT SOMETHING THAT WAS
UNCONSTITUTION CONSTITUTIONAL
FROM THE U.S. GOVERNOR, MY FIRST
THOUGHT WOULD BE TO SEND A COPY
OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND SAY
WHAT PART OF THIS ARE WE GETTING
WRONG?
>> YOU HAVE A LOT OF GOVERNMENT
CAN TRACTS.
>> WHAT PART OF THIS ARE WE GET
REDDING WRONG, JUST TELL ME.
>> YOU’RE KIND OF EXPOSED IN
YOUR OTHER BUSINESSES SO IN CASE
VIEWERS RN FOLLOWING THIS,
YOU’RE NOT JUST A JOURNALIST
TAKING A STAND ON BEHALF OF THE
FIRST AMENDMENT, YOU’RE A GUY
WITH BIG GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS
GIVING THE FINGER TO THE
GOVERNMENT.
DO YOU THINK, UM, TWITTER WILL
BE A CENTRAL TO THIS
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN AS IT WAS
IN THE LAST SEVERAL?
>> I THINK IT WILL PLAY A
SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN ELECTIONS,
NOT JUST DOMESTICALLY BUT
INTERNATIONALLY.
THE GOAL OF NEW TWITTER IS TO
BE, UM, AS FAIR AND EVEN-HANDED
AS POSSIBLE.
SO NOT FAVORING ANY POLITICAL
IDEOLOGY, BUT JUST BEING FAIR TO
ALL.
>> WHY DOESN’T FACEBOOK DO THIS?
I KNOW THAT ZUCKERBERG HAS SAID,
AND I TAKE HIM AT FACE VALUE,
THAT HE --
I DO, ACTUALLY, IN THIS WAY.
THAT HE IS A KIND OF
OLD-FASHIONED LIBERAL WHO
DOESN’T LIKE TO SENSOR.
HE HAS, BUT YOU KNOW, WHY
WOULDN’T A COMPANY LIKE THAT
TAKE THE STAND THAT YOU HAVE
TAKEN?
IT’S PRETTY ROOTED IN AMERICAN
TRADITIONAL POLITICAL CUSTOM,
YOU KNOW, FOR FREE SPEECH.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
ZUCKERBERG SPENT $400 MILLION IN
THE LAST ELECTION, NORMALLY IN A
GET OUT THE VOTE CAMPAIGN BUT
FUNDAMENTALLY IN SUPPORT OF
DEMOCRATS.
IS THAT ACCURATE OR IS THAT NOT
ACCURATE?
>> THAT IS ACK YET T.
>> DOES THAT SOUND UNBIAS YOU
TO?
>> NO.
SO YOU DON’T SEE HOPE THAT
FACEBOOK WILL APPROACH THIS AS A
NOT ALIGNED ARBITER.
DO YOU THINK.
DODGED FROM THE WILL GO BACK ON
TWITTER? >> THAT OBVIOUSLY UP TO HIM.
>> THAT OBVIOUSLY UP TO HIM.
MY JOB IS TO, YOU KNOW, I TAKE
FREEDOM OF SPEECH VERY SERIOUSLY
SO, IT’S YOU KNOW, I DIDN’T VOTE
FOR DONALD TRUMP.
I ACTUALLY VOTED FOR BIDEN.
I’M NOT SAYING I’M A HUGE FAN OF
BIDEN BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE
INACCURATE, BUT YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE DIFFICULT CHOICES TO MAKE
IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.
IT’S NOT -- I WOULD PREFER,
FRANKLY, THAT WE PUT SOMEONE,
JUST A NORMAL PERSON, AS
PRESIDENT, A NORMAL PERSON WITH
COMMON SENSE AND WHOSE VALUES
ARE SMACK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
COUNTRY.
YOU KNOW, JUST CENTER OF THE
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION AND I THINK
THAT THEY WOULD BE GREAT.
I THINK WE HAVE, MAYY BEING