[memish]

"A large coalition of political/social activist groups agreed not to try to kill Twitter by starving us of advertising revenue if I agreed to this condition.

They broke the deal." https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1595196519598080000

The condition he's referring to is the moderation council he had announced. Apparently they demanded a council, he agreed, announced it, and then they pressured advertisers anyway?

[dagmx]

This sounds like Illuminati conspiracy from Musk. Who is this “coalition”, and why would they be making deals on whether or not to attack his platform?

Also if they were actually activist, why would they be satisfied with just a moderation council? Surely if they cared about causes enough to agree to not criticize Twitter, they would criticize it for other things that would pop up?

This sounds like Elon didn’t bother setting up a council (there was never proof he tried) and is looking to spin the story now that advertisers are dropping off.

Remember that key advertisers dropped off before he even announced the idea of a council. They even specifically mentioned that his erratic behaviour was part of the reason.

I think Elon is going for the classic “victimhood” play to garner sympathy.

[Robotbeat]

I noticed that. There was an announcement of a council, people from certain specific organizations were part of it, then a day later I noticed those same organizations had joined on to pressure advertisers to boycott Twitter. Seemed weird and a bit disheartening, seeing that I was hoping for the various parties to come to some sort of mutually beneficial understanding.

[jhp123]

if unnamed "activist groups" are trying to kill twitter advertising then there should be a paper trail of ... activism, no?

[lawn]

Moderation council? As he showed pretty clearly by unbanning Trump and others, its only member is Musk himself.