Social Musk becomes largest shareholder of twitter

Yes, more tweets were produced by the dem accounts, but that doesn't say anything about what the split is between users' ideology, nor does it tell us anything about the nature of those tweets. The 69% and 26% split is between the people who produces the most tweets, not between the total userbase. It tells us that dem accounts are more active, most likely because dem users are younger. Granted I'm sure that there are more dem leaning users on the platform, but those numbers don't examine that.

When taking the top 10% of active users on both political sides and comparing them, yes, that number is fixed. We know that they have an equal amount of followers, that is explained in the article. So, regardless of whether or not the top 10% of active democrat users tweet more than the top 10% of the active republican users, they have the same audience.

I edited my last post to answer your theory about reach. It doesn't hold up when looking at the data. I'll just re-post it here:

EDIT: To amend your last post, liberals were more likely to share out-group content but provided less negative coverage of it. In-group sharing is mostly highly critical of the other party on a place like twitter anyway. The evidence in that study points to conservatives being more negative of the outgroup, ie, bitching, not less. Lastly the amount of out-group sharing is so small that it wouldn't be enough to drive the amplification to that extent.

My mistake was assuming that the bottom 90% of Twitter users share a similar political profile to the top 10%. That was an assumption, but it seems to hold up more or less when looking at Twitter users (well, Twitter news consumers) overall:

% of Social media site's regular news consumers who are...

Twitter
Dem/Lean Dem:65
Rep/Lean Rep: 33

https://www.pewresearch.org/journal...1/01/PJ_2021.01.12_news-social-media_0-04.png

Moreover, 32% of Democrats use Twitter, but only 17% of Republicans do.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...t-facebook/ft_2021-04-07_socialmediaparty_01/
 
Last edited:
Can you post the numbers from that study that prove left wing sharing of right wing media is insignificant?

The point I made in my first response to you was: "top Republican accounts have a similar number of followers, but there are still fewer of them. Meaning that the ratio of Dem to Rep accounts being followed is still 69:26." This has not been contested by anything you have said. My point was to compare Twitter in that context to TV ratings. There are considerably more left wing accounts to follow and so them having the same number of followers on average is suggestive of left wing messaging being considerably stronger overall.
You are not getting it. I'm tired and it's late here, but I'll try my best to explain.

The percentages in the article covering how active users are, tells us nothing about how many there are. Let's imagine that a platform had 100 users with 50 being Democrats and 50 being Republican. On that platform, 10 users were really active. They produced almost all the content. Out of those, 7 were democrats and 3 were republican. So, we would know that of the top 10 most active users (10%), the split would be 70% democrats and 30% republican. But, there would still be 50 of each on the platform in this example. The article is only covering the split of those 10 very active users, NOT how many users there are who are democrats or republicans.

Moving on to the second part about the followers. Let's say that there are top 10% of democratic users post 1000 tweets and the top 10% of republican users only post 500 tweets. We don't know how many users are in each group. So, the democrats are more active yes. However, despite this, they both have the same amount of followers. So, while the democrat users tweet more, the amount of people who see them compared to the republican users are the same. The number of followers is fixed and even if the republican group was fewer users, that wouldn't matter as the followers is still the same. The 69:26 ratio you keep mentioning doesn't apply even if that number did represent the ratio of users.

There is a reason why the wording of the article is despite (as is contrary to what you would believe based on activity levels) and tweet volume (not users):
"Despite these substantive differences in tweet volume, the top 10% most active Democrats and Republicans are comparable in terms of the number of accounts they follow (580 vs. 582), the number of accounts who follow them (342 vs. 354) and the number of tweets they favorite in a typical month."

I'm way too tired to explain it any better than this atm. Going to bed for now.
 
Last edited:
You are not getting it. I'm tired and it's late here, but I'll try my best to explain.

The percentages in the article covering how active users are, tells us nothing about how many there are. Let's imagine that a platform had 100 users with 50 being Democrats and 50 being Republican. On that platform, 10 users were really active. They produced almost all the content. Out of those, 7 were democrats and 3 were republican. So, we would know that of the top 10 most active users (10%), the split would be 70% democrats and 30% republican. But, there would still be 50 of each on the platform in this example. The article is only covering the split of those 10 very active users, NOT how many users there are who are democrats or republicans.

Moving on to the second part about the followers. Let's say that there are top 10% of democratic users post 1000 tweets and the top 10% of republican users only post 500 tweets. So, the democrats are more active yes. However, despite this, they both have the same amount of followers. So, while the democrat users tweet more, the amount of people who see them compared to the republican users are the same. The number of followers is fixed. The 69:26 ratio you keep mentioning doesn't apply even if that number did represent the ratio of users.

There is a reason why the wording of the article is despite (as is contrary to what you would believe based on activity levels) and tweet volume (not users):
"Despite these substantive differences in tweet volume, the top 10% most active Democrats and Republicans are comparable in terms of the number of accounts they follow (580 vs. 582), the number of accounts who follow them (342 vs. 354) and the number of tweets they favorite in a typical month."

I'm way too tired to explain it any better than this atm.

I conceded you were correct about the point you made in an edit to my post a while ago. I assumed that the top 10% and bottom 90% would have similar political profiles. I posted another link demonstrating that Twitter news consumers share a similar ratio, however. Being 65:33 as opposed to 69:26.

And you didn't respond to my request to quantitatively substantiate your assertion that left wing sharing of right wing content in insignificant.
 
Last edited:
st-Copy.jpg


cries about how victimized he thinks he is and then posts a low iq meme. do you have anything more or is that it?
 
Not surprised your conception of what happened is laughably incorrect.
They literally accepted his offer in a binding agreement to start, but sure, play with your own poo in fantasy land.

Yes, they accepted his offer after they found out their plan to keep him from buying would get them sued by shareholders for breaching fiduciary duty.

I know he made a binding offer, I also know the board originally tried to find a way to may the company worthless if he did buy it.

Oh, and then they had on-line support groups for each other as they whined and gnashed teeth after he made that binding offer.
 
Musk, Ellison gonna team up with trump, Patrick byrne, and mike Lindell to save the world. Never felt more patriotic and blessed for creating this create thread

*cue halo’s rock and roll anthem to save the world*




drafting Kayne to the GOAT all star team. This was the October surprise

 
"Late on Thursday, Twitter tried to calm some of the concerns. In a memo to employees after the report of job cuts, Sean Edgett, the general counsel, said there were no plans for layoffs."

7500 employees are leaving before Elon layoff of employees. Twitter going to be a fun place lol.

"Late on Thursday, Twitter tried to calm some of the concerns. In a memo to employees after the report of job cuts, Sean Edgett, the general counsel, said there were no plans for layoffs."

Meaning layoffs incoming in lawyer speak.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...chnology/twitter-employees-elon-musk.amp.html
 
INC has never been a fan of Zuk just wanted to post this to show how different Mark handled these things vs the flaming hot mess that Elon doing at Twitter. While Elon shares cute photos of his son he is putting beds in break rooms, telling employees they have to work 80 hour weeks at least an think they have a bomb attached to their heads. While like half of Twitter employees are fired some by a phone call.

Being let go is aways hard but it seems Zuk trying to be as heart felt vs Elon sh#t show.


"
LEAD
Mark Zuckerberg's Message to Laid-Off Meta Employees Is a Masterclass in Good Leadership
Contrary to Elon Musk's handling of Twitter's mass exodus, this is a breath of fresh air.
BY MARCEL SCHWANTES, INC. CONTRIBUTING EDITOR AND FOUNDER, LEADERSHIP FROM THE CORE@MARCELSCHWANTES
metaleader_522315_ggfwgy.jpg

Mark Zuckerberg.
Photo: Getty Images



Layoffs disrupt lives and livelihoods, and fuel fear and anxiety toward an uncertain future for those being let go. While Elon Musk's handling of Twitter's mass exodus was a complete train wreck, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's November message to employees, available to the public, shows a different story of managing a mega layoff process.

ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
B28830875.350106144;dc_trk_aid=541233905;dc_trk_cid=180982242;ord=23475647259040255;dc_lat=;dc_rdid=;tag_for_child_directed_treatment=;tfua=;gdpr=;gdpr_consent=$%7BGDPR_CONSENT_755%7D;ltd=

Zuckerberg laid off more than 11,000 employees, about 13 percent of the workforce. "I view layoffs as a last resort," stated the Meta CEO, citing all other cost-cutting sources before ultimately choosing to let teammates go.

Article continues after video.

An Inc.com Featured Presentation








Basically what I have is a capsule wardrobe

1 second of 3 seconds












Most of us can agree that Meta, formerly Facebook, has a questionable business model when it comes to user privacy. I am no fan of any tech company that collects information about you and then sells that information to advertisers so they can target their ads right at you.

But I am a fan of good leadership when it is on public display, which is what this article is about, even if you're a Zuck-hater (and you can certainly disagree with me on social media). In an age of heartless termination announcements over Zoom, there are two notable leadership lessons in Zuckerberg's communication approach with all Meta employees, including those laid off.


1. He takes ownership of the problem
Everything rises and falls on leadership, as the popular saying goes. Zuckerberg is quick to start off by pointing the finger at himself for the layoffs and offers an apology:

I want to take accountability for these decisions and for how we got here. I know this is tough for everyone, and I'm especially sorry to those impacted.

It's certainly a good start. And while many high-profile leaders would have cut things short to deflect blame and lessen the impact on their reputation, Zuckerberg offers an honest account of the misguided steps and financial business decisions that paved the way to the massive layoff. "Not only has online commerce returned to prior trends, but the macroeconomic downturn, increased competition, and ads signal loss have caused our revenue to be much lower than I'd expected. I got this wrong, and I take responsibility for that," said Zuckerberg.

This type of public acknowledgment could be a hit too hard to take and not a hill to die on for many in executive roles. Zuckerberg took a leap of faith that, by being 100 percent honest with his shortcomings and modeling authenticity, others in management roles would follow. The first step -- one that Zuckerberg handled to perfection -- is to embrace mistakes made, have the courage to face your critics, and always acknowledge current reality. Zuckerberg put it out on the table, took ownership, and paved the way forward for those staying.

When executives are that open and honest and lead by example, it frees up other managers to initiate honest conversations with their employees to generate solutions that will safeguard them from future lapses in judgment. This builds trust and loyalty among the teams that were not let go, decreases their own level of uncertainty about the future, and lets them see their leaders not as larger-than-life corporate heroes, but as fallen human beings capable of making mistakes, like the rest of us.

2. He sets clear expectations and offers support
Layoff notices should always be in person or in small groups whenever possible and should come from your immediate manager. So we will assume positive intent here, and trust that Meta's managers communicated the layoffs before Zuckerberg sent off his video announcement.

Because of the sensitive nature of layoffs, it makes a world of difference when there's a conscious effort to humanize the approach with clear expectations for those about to be let go. Without clear expectations, confusion sets in and everyone is guessing at what the future holds. This can cause disruption for other workers, hampering their own productivity and affecting their morale on the job while they watch their soon-to-be laid-off peers and co-workers suffer from botched or unclear communication.

Zuckerberg, however, took action and spelled out the details. "There is no good way to do a layoff, but we hope to get all the relevant information to you as quickly as possible and then do whatever we can to support you through this," he stated.

Laid-off employees also need all kinds of support during what could be a harrowing transition where lives and families are at stake.

"Every affected employee will have the opportunity to speak with someone to get their questions answered and join information sessions," promised Zuckerberg.

Zuckerberg went on to display textbook empathy in his message with a clear road map of what types of support and resources are to be expected. Some of the details in the U.S., according to the announcement, include:

  • Severance: "We will pay 16 weeks of base pay plus two additional weeks for every year of service, with no cap."
  • PTO: "We'll pay for all remaining PTO."
  • Health insurance: "We'll cover the cost of health care for people and their families for six months."
  • Career services: "We'll provide three months of career support with an external vendor, including early access to unpublished job leads."
  • Immigration support: "I know this is especially difficult if you're here on a visa. We have dedicated immigration specialists to help guide you based on what you and your family need."
 
INC has never been a fan of Zuk just wanted to post this to show how different Mark handled these things vs the flaming hot mess that Elon doing at Twitter. While Elon shares cute photos of his son he is putting beds in break rooms, telling employees they have to work 80 hour weeks at least an think they have a bomb attached to their heads. While like half of Twitter employees are fired some by a phone call.

Being let go is aways hard but it seems Zuk trying to be as heart felt vs Elon sh#t show.


"
LEAD
Mark Zuckerberg's Message to Laid-Off Meta Employees Is a Masterclass in Good Leadership
Contrary to Elon Musk's handling of Twitter's mass exodus, this is a breath of fresh air.
BY MARCEL SCHWANTES, INC. CONTRIBUTING EDITOR AND FOUNDER, LEADERSHIP FROM THE CORE@MARCELSCHWANTES
metaleader_522315_ggfwgy.jpg

Mark Zuckerberg.
Photo: Getty Images



Layoffs disrupt lives and livelihoods, and fuel fear and anxiety toward an uncertain future for those being let go. While Elon Musk's handling of Twitter's mass exodus was a complete train wreck, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's November message to employees, available to the public, shows a different story of managing a mega layoff process.

ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
B28830875.350106144;dc_trk_aid=541233905;dc_trk_cid=180982242;ord=23475647259040255;dc_lat=;dc_rdid=;tag_for_child_directed_treatment=;tfua=;gdpr=;gdpr_consent=$%7BGDPR_CONSENT_755%7D;ltd=

Zuckerberg laid off more than 11,000 employees, about 13 percent of the workforce. "I view layoffs as a last resort," stated the Meta CEO, citing all other cost-cutting sources before ultimately choosing to let teammates go.

Article continues after video.

An Inc.com Featured Presentation








Basically what I have is a capsule wardrobe

1 second of 3 seconds












Most of us can agree that Meta, formerly Facebook, has a questionable business model when it comes to user privacy. I am no fan of any tech company that collects information about you and then sells that information to advertisers so they can target their ads right at you.

But I am a fan of good leadership when it is on public display, which is what this article is about, even if you're a Zuck-hater (and you can certainly disagree with me on social media). In an age of heartless termination announcements over Zoom, there are two notable leadership lessons in Zuckerberg's communication approach with all Meta employees, including those laid off.


1. He takes ownership of the problem
Everything rises and falls on leadership, as the popular saying goes. Zuckerberg is quick to start off by pointing the finger at himself for the layoffs and offers an apology:

I want to take accountability for these decisions and for how we got here. I know this is tough for everyone, and I'm especially sorry to those impacted.

It's certainly a good start. And while many high-profile leaders would have cut things short to deflect blame and lessen the impact on their reputation, Zuckerberg offers an honest account of the misguided steps and financial business decisions that paved the way to the massive layoff. "Not only has online commerce returned to prior trends, but the macroeconomic downturn, increased competition, and ads signal loss have caused our revenue to be much lower than I'd expected. I got this wrong, and I take responsibility for that," said Zuckerberg.

This type of public acknowledgment could be a hit too hard to take and not a hill to die on for many in executive roles. Zuckerberg took a leap of faith that, by being 100 percent honest with his shortcomings and modeling authenticity, others in management roles would follow. The first step -- one that Zuckerberg handled to perfection -- is to embrace mistakes made, have the courage to face your critics, and always acknowledge current reality. Zuckerberg put it out on the table, took ownership, and paved the way forward for those staying.

When executives are that open and honest and lead by example, it frees up other managers to initiate honest conversations with their employees to generate solutions that will safeguard them from future lapses in judgment. This builds trust and loyalty among the teams that were not let go, decreases their own level of uncertainty about the future, and lets them see their leaders not as larger-than-life corporate heroes, but as fallen human beings capable of making mistakes, like the rest of us.

2. He sets clear expectations and offers support
Layoff notices should always be in person or in small groups whenever possible and should come from your immediate manager. So we will assume positive intent here, and trust that Meta's managers communicated the layoffs before Zuckerberg sent off his video announcement.

Because of the sensitive nature of layoffs, it makes a world of difference when there's a conscious effort to humanize the approach with clear expectations for those about to be let go. Without clear expectations, confusion sets in and everyone is guessing at what the future holds. This can cause disruption for other workers, hampering their own productivity and affecting their morale on the job while they watch their soon-to-be laid-off peers and co-workers suffer from botched or unclear communication.

Zuckerberg, however, took action and spelled out the details. "There is no good way to do a layoff, but we hope to get all the relevant information to you as quickly as possible and then do whatever we can to support you through this," he stated.

Laid-off employees also need all kinds of support during what could be a harrowing transition where lives and families are at stake.

"Every affected employee will have the opportunity to speak with someone to get their questions answered and join information sessions," promised Zuckerberg.

Zuckerberg went on to display textbook empathy in his message with a clear road map of what types of support and resources are to be expected. Some of the details in the U.S., according to the announcement, include:

  • Severance: "We will pay 16 weeks of base pay plus two additional weeks for every year of service, with no cap."
  • PTO: "We'll pay for all remaining PTO."
  • Health insurance: "We'll cover the cost of health care for people and their families for six months."
  • Career services: "We'll provide three months of career support with an external vendor, including early access to unpublished job leads."
  • Immigration support: "I know this is especially difficult if you're here on a visa. We have dedicated immigration specialists to help guide you based on what you and your family need."
Heaven forbid those Meta layoffs turn against the company and expose all the shady shit the people at the top have been up to

What a great humanitarian you are Zuk
 
"
"If you’ve ever secretly wanted a 6-foot-high sculpture of an @ sign that doubles as a planter, now is your chance. "Elon needs the money lol

"The sculpture is one of the hundreds of items from Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters going on the auction block, including a blue Twitter bird statue, a handful of Eames chairs, giant, flat panel TVs, and a variety of kitchen equipment ranging from a vegetable dryer to more than a dozen espresso machines."
 
Heaven forbid those Meta layoffs turn against the company and expose all the shady shit the people at the top have been up to

What a great humanitarian you are Zuk
Compared to the flaming garbage going on with Twitter he was able to offer 6 months health insurance coverage, 16 weeks paid an 2 weeks every year worked, an meetings with management, an something Twitter did nothing an called some in the middle of the night to tell them they were fired.
 

It's almost as if he bought a company, the past owner was too stupid to erase all the criminal shit they were doing and The new owner found out !!!

Geez wonder how that works?
 
Compared to the flaming garbage going on with Twitter he was able to offer 6 months health insurance coverage, 16 weeks paid an 2 weeks every year worked, an meetings with management, an something Twitter did nothing an called some in the middle of the night to tell them they were fired.

Twitter still offered more in their layoffs than most companies do... what Meta is doing should get them sued by their shareholders, it's way too much.
 
Twitter still offered more in their layoffs than most companies do... what Meta is doing should get them sued by their shareholders, it's way too much.
Just a question what was offered by Twitter towards employees that where fired? I think Elon was pretty fast and lose with the reasoning why someone was fired vs laid off. His reasoning makes one wonder what benefits offered to employees laid off? I have not heard anything specific could you provide a link?
 
Back
Top