[TheOtherHobbes]

Twitter owns the contextual value of your tweets. It owns the virtual land on which you can seed tweets to grow value.

And it sells access to the virtual land to advertisers who put up billboards all over it.

And it gives Musk powers that feudal lords never had. He has total control over which content grows value, and which remains ignored and barren.

[bdowling]

You seem to think this situation is very different from what publishers have done for at least hundreds of years. For at least hundreds of years, publishers have published many, many books each year, only a few of which become bestsellers. The publishers have wielded a lot influence over what books become popular (e.g., by telling booksellers to place them in good spots in stores, by getting reviewers to review them).

Unlike a traditional publisher, however, to whom an author sells the exclusive right to publish a work, you have the right to take your tweets and publish them elsewhere. There are many examples of authors who have adapted their Twitter posts into blog articles or books, and published them on other platforms, or even in print.

As for the contextual value of your tweets, if the tweets form one half of a conversation with a real person whose tweets you cannot use elsewhere, then they can be recast in the form of a dialogue with a fictional person, something which has been done since the days of Socrates.