March 2, 2020

"A billionaire Republican megadonor has purchased a 'sizable' stake in Twitter and 'plans to push' to oust CEO Jack Dorsey among other changes..."

"... according to new reports, raising the prospect of a shocking election-year shakeup of the social media platform that conservatives have long accused of overt left-wing political bias. Paul Singer’s Elliott Management Corp. has already nominated four directors to Twitter's board.... [U]nlike other prominent tech CEOs, Dorsey didn't have voting control over Twitter because the company had just one class of stock; and he has long been a target for removal given Twitter's struggling user growth numbers and stock performance. Singer, who opposed President Trump's campaign in 2016, has since changed his tune, raising the prospect that some of the changes to Twitter could make the platform a friendlier place for pro-Trump users.... Twitter has long rankled not only conservatives but also independent-minded commentators and left-of-center activists. In 2018, feminist Meghan Murphy slammed Twitter for the 'dangerous' banning and silencing of users who didn't follow the platform's guidelines. Murphy was banned after writing that 'men aren't women,' in defiance of Twitter's stated views on gender...."

Fox News reports.

39 comments:

Bay Area Guy said...

As long as he bans Anna Navarro, I'll be happy:)

Just kidding! Lighten up, Francis.

Michael K said...

Oh Oh. Panic sets in .

TRISTRAM said...

Then we’ll see how the lefts views on censorship by a private company ‘evolves.’

Drago said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

Singer/Elliot only purchased about $1Billion in stock whereas Dorsey owns almost $5B.

Where Singer has a point is that Dorsey for the last 4 or 5 years has been CEO of Twitter and another company, which irritates the board members of Twitter because the board believes Twitter is undervalued due to poor performance which could be corrected with a fulltime CEO who is not dividing his/her time with another entity.

This is not a political play. It's a money play.

Browndog said...

Remember, it was Singer that initially paid Fusion GPS for dirt on Trump in the early going of the 2016 GOP primary season.

I wouldn't doubt if he's trying to oust Dorsey so he can kick Trump off twitter.

Ken B said...

I think Drago is likely right. Twitter has been making stupid business decisions. That’s a profit opportunity for those who specialize in corporate takeovers.

YoungHegelian said...

men aren't women

Such is the profoundly Stalinist mind-set of Silicon Valley 2.0 that such an innocuous thought such as "men aren't women" can get you banned from Twitter.

The rot goes a lot deeper than just Twitter.

Richard Fagin said...

However things work out for Twitter, consider this: Publicly traded companies that structure their voting interests to protect management ( are almost immune from investor pressure to clean up their acts. Alphabet/Google and The New York Times Co. are two notable offenders. Good that some big money is trying to shake things up at Twitter.

stevew said...

"Friendlier", in this context, is really "Less Hostile".

traditionalguy said...

If Twitter is just fair and balanced like FOX NEWS then the monopoly offering the CIA propaganda narrative or nothing at all will be broken. Then expand that to a new Youtube channel that has same approach.

Achilles said...

Drago said...


This is not a political play. It's a money play.

And a Power play.

Singer paid for Fusion GPS investigations of Trump.

He is a "Republican Megadonor" the same way Kristol is a "Republican commentator."

Dorsey is being too overt and allowing competitors to move in the free speech lane.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

free speech for all - what a concept?

daskol said...

Twitter stopped taking political advertisements, as they define them. And then got all righteous about FaceBook not adequately policing political speech on their platform. This should get pretty interesting.

tim in vermont said...

I think that I am going to ditch my subscription to the New York Times because I no longer trust them on anything, not just on politics. I feel like their coronavirus reporting is just going to be more Trump bashing rather than hard news. Two of their opinion writers have pushed Trumpvirus and now it is trending on Twitter.

It used to be a wonderful resource.

wbfjrr2 said...

What took you so long, Auntie? They’ve been terrible for years.

wendybar said...

Good, let's start censoring Progressives!!! Even the field.

tim in vermont said...

"They’ve been terrible for years.”

Yeah, but you could adjust for it. Kind of like watching the scrambled porn station on the old cable systems. You could sort of figure out what was going on.

I think that they should change their motto from “All the news we see fit to print” to “Based on true events.” And that last one is charitable.

chuck said...

I no longer trust them on anything, not just on politics.

I started to feel that way back during the Kosovo War (1998-1999). Fortunately it was the early days of news on the internet and the Guardian, Telegraph, Le Monde, and Liberation were all available for free. Believe it or not, the Guardian was readable at that time. And the Matt cartoons in the Telegraph were great.

narciso said...

in other news, in Israeli ground hog day, it appears that Netanyahu has won again.

chuck said...

Appropriate Matt Cartoon.

daskol said...

Best comment I've ever seen on newspapers, and how we read them.

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
– Michael Crichton (1942-2008)

Iman said...

OT, but RIP Jack Welch... I really liked that ol' bastard...

Iman said...

Twitter is where soon-to-be-old narcissists go to hopefully die...

rcocean said...

Paul Singer is NOT a conservative. He's a liberal Globalist like the Koch Brothers.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Now do Youtube and Google.

and late-night network TeeVee.

Drago said...

rcocean: "Paul Singer is NOT a conservative. He's a liberal Globalist like the Koch Brothers."

Who exactly is claiming Singer is a conservative?

rcocean said...

Elliot management was criticized by Tucker Carlson and others for destroying rural American including a small town in Nebraska. Paul Singer is not a conservative, he only wants to make $$, not pay taxes, and support wars in the middle east. bill Kristol is his good friend. He also is pro-choice and hates Evangelicals.

Drago said...

rcocean: "Elliot management was criticized by Tucker Carlson and others for destroying rural American including a small town in Nebraska."

That was a fantastic segment. Really hit Sasse hard for keeping his yap shut because Singer is a big donor to him.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

OT: I've just discovered James Veitch

LOL. wow - he's hilarious.

narciso said...

well in this neck of the woods, it was singer's candidate who defeated Bloomberg's candidate,

Michael said...

Elliott will bring institutions along. Look for them to get a minimum of 2 board seats out of this, possibly 3. And then the work begins.

Harsh Pencil said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harsh Pencil said...

I agree with Chuck. Matt at The Telegraph is fantastic. (But he seems to be taking a few days vacation).

walter said...

Perhaps Dorsey has spent too much time meditating and starving.

John henry said...

Is this the same Paul singer who wrote "ghost fleet"?

Which I am currently reading

John Henry

narciso said...

different fellow, this one's a hedge fund manager,

Birkel said...

Twitter is an underperforming stock. It has lost share price over the last five years. Everything else (nearly) is performing better. Twitter is a takeover target because Dorsey has led poorly.

The politics is beside the point. Dorsey has been leaving money on the table. This is business. And the 'reasons' has poorly run his business do not matter.

(The press leaping to defend Dorsey is a major tell about the why, btw.)

RobinGoodfellow said...

“Happy learned how to putt! Uh oh!”