Twitter 'business model' - from engineer who works there via Project Veritas

[gamecockcat]

Article about an interview with an engineer who works at Twitter and, besides his admission that Twitter is not about freedom of speech at all, the more interesting comment he had was about his 'work' schedule.

He admitted to only working 4 hours PER WEEK for quite some time and several of his colleagues have taken 'months' off for 'mental health breaks'. According to this employee, their business is not set up to make a profit. So, who/what is underwriting Twitter? It's supposedly a public corporation with a Board of Directors, etc. but employees are working one day part-time per week (the ones that bother to work at all, that is, according to this employee)? How is that even possible? Couldn't this turn into a huge scandal if Twitter turns out to be a dummy corporation for who knows what - government, political action committees, money laundering operation, etc.? It sounds far-fetched but, when an actual employee admits to a 4-hour workweek and he claims that his 'work ethic' should qualify him for a promotion, maybe the far-fetched isn't so impossible.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/twitter_does_not_believe_in_free_speech.html

 

[jameslee32]

O'Keefe- the last bastion of truth. lmfao

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Anyone who's read my political board posts about Twitter and other social media all already knew these points for years now. Finally they're coming to the surface since their acquisition is in the due diligence phase.

To sum up years of posts: Twitter has no legitimate income stream that can support it's market cap or any of their other financials. They make virtually nothing from ads or promoted posts. So where does the money actually come from?

The only answer is it comes from state actors, which almost certainly includes the USA, china, and Iran or some other combination of Islamic extremist nation states.

It's literally a for hire propaganda tool and a good one.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Anyone who's read my political board posts about Twitter and other social media all already knew these points for years now. Finally they're coming to the surface since their acquisition is in the due diligence phase.

To sum up years of posts: Twitter has no legitimate income stream that can support it's market cap or any of their other financials. They make virtually nothing from ads or promoted posts. So where does the money actually come from?

The only answer is it comes from state actors, which almost certainly includes the USA, china, and Iran or some other combination of Islamic extremist nation states.

It's literally a for hire propaganda tool and a good one.

I don’t believe that the proposed offer by @elon musk ($54.20) comes close to the intrinsic value of @Twitter given its growth prospects.

- Prince Alwaleed bin Talal

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I'll tell you.. once you set things up from an IT standpoint.. unless you're moving onto new projects, there isn't a lot to do, aside from monitor it and if it goes down, fix it. Some people make their living off owning one system and just babysitting it.

If you check the SysAdmin subReddit, you'll find there's anywhere from 2-hour work weeks to 70-hour work weeks. Not surprised at all. Information technology is a very weird beast when it comes to jobs and work/life balance. There's really nothing to compare it to.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Some people online think the revelation of Twitter being majorly bot driven will result in some fec or sec investigation.

While there might be something for solely lip service; nothing serious will happen. The us government is absolutely involved in it so nothing will go too deep for that reason

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

O'Keefe- the last bastion of truth. lmfao

Is your complaint the way he gets the info or the info itself? Are you trying to say the people interviewed are either in on it or lying in some way?

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Anyone who's read my political board posts about Twitter and other social media all already knew these points for years now. Finally they're coming to the surface since their acquisition is in the due diligence phase.

To sum up years of posts: Twitter has no legitimate income stream that can support it's market cap or any of their other financials. They make virtually nothing from ads or promoted posts. So where does the money actually come from?

The only answer is it comes from state actors, which almost certainly includes the USA, china, and Iran or some other combination of Islamic extremist nation states.

It's literally a for hire propaganda tool and a good one.

Since it is a public company, wouldn't that be readily verifiable?

 

[mrhotdice]

I don’t believe that the proposed offer by @elon musk ($54.20) comes close to the intrinsic value of @Twitter given its growth prospects.

- Prince Alwaleed bin Talal

Good quote when oil is $110.00 a barrel.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Some people online think the revelation of Twitter being majorly bot driven will result in some fec or sec investigation.

While there might be something for solely lip service; nothing serious will happen. The us government is absolutely involved in it so nothing will go too deep for that reason

If that were true, wouldn't they shut down a Musk purchase attempt? He would expose everything and everyone.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Since it is a public company, wouldn't that be readily verifiable?

Not every source of income would be publicly available. The public info is more or less a balance sheet with some additional summary statement about revenue sources etc. Not the specific income from all sources. That would be available on tax returns.

If that were true, wouldn't they shut down a Musk purchase attempt? He would expose everything and everyone.

They tried. Initially they refused his offer more or less on principle. Then, almost surely on advice of counsel to avoid derivative lawsuits, they reversed course and accepted. Corporations exist for the profit of their shareholders, not for the social causes or to do business with only people they like. Refusing the offer was about to expose the board to major liability.

Just a guess but this is all coming to light during a period of initial due diligence. Any actual major acquisition only "closes" after due diligence and several other items of import are investigated and vetted. I'm guessing they started that process assuming shareholders would approve the sale and that's why musk mentions an nda; but that's just a guess.

 

[80 Proof]

O'Keefe- the last bastion of truth. lmfao

Is an ad hominiem attack your only response to the video?

 

[Hank Camacho_rivals115797]

If that were true, wouldn't they shut down a Musk purchase attempt? He would expose everything and everyone.

That might be why the powers that be would be ok with Musk as a buyer. With SpaceX, etc., he's deeply tied into the military industrial complex (or at least seems to be). He's provided the Ukraine with technology help during the war and I can't imagine that he would have done so without clearing it with the US government first.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Not every source of income would be publicly available. The public info is more or less a balance sheet with some additional summary statement about revenue sources etc. Not the specific income from all sources. That would be available on tax returns.



They tried. Initially they refused his offer more or less on principle. Then, almost surely on advice of counsel to avoid derivative lawsuits, they reversed course and accepted. Corporations exist for the profit of their shareholders, not for the social causes or to do business with only people they like. Refusing the offer was about to expose the board to major liability.

Just a guess but this is all coming to light during a period of initial due diligence. Any actual major acquisition only "closes" after due diligence and several other items of import are investigated and vetted. I'm guessing they started that process assuming shareholders would approve the sale and that's why musk mentions an nda; but that's just a guess.

I meant the government.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Not every source of income would be publicly available. The public info is more or less a balance sheet with some additional summary statement about revenue sources etc. Not the specific income from all sources. That would be available on tax returns.



They tried. Initially they refused his offer more or less on principle. Then, almost surely on advice of counsel to avoid derivative lawsuits, they reversed course and accepted. Corporations exist for the profit of their shareholders, not for the social causes or to do business with only people they like. Refusing the offer was about to expose the board to major liability.

Just a guess but this is all coming to light during a period of initial due diligence. Any actual major acquisition only "closes" after due diligence and several other items of import are investigated and vetted. I'm guessing they started that process assuming shareholders would approve the sale and that's why musk mentions an nda; but that's just a guess.

I guess I was speaking rhetorically a bit. I was a finance major at UK. I understand how to review a publicly traded company. Btw, a balance sheet doesn't show you a lot but their financial statements do. Twitter is making a profit. Their EPS was most recently 1.13 I believe. 86% of their revenue comes from ads while 14% comes from data services for other companies. While I don't use Twitter much, I do see ads pretty much every time I'm on it. I neither trust nor like Twitter, at the moment, but much of what has been said in this thread is bordering on being a conspiracy theory.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

I guess I was speaking rhetorically a bit. I was a finance major at UK. I understand how to review a publicly traded company. Btw, a balance sheet doesn't show you a lot but their financial statements do. Twitter is making a profit. Their EPS was most recently 1.13 I believe. 86% of their revenue comes from ads while 14% comes from data services for other companies. While I don't use Twitter much, I do see ads pretty much every time I'm on it. I neither trust nor like Twitter, at the moment, but much of what has been said in this thread is bordering on being a conspiracy theory.

Twitter is making a profit. That's not the issue. The issue is how and where is the money coming from.

I see ads too. Everyone does. Problem with Twitter is their click ratios are exceedingly low. So people see them, they just don't drive action like they do on Facebook or ig.

The issue has always been the not so secret fact that Twitter is loaded with bots. They would never release the amount of unique users. Those two issues have long been the albatross that keeps ad buys way down on that platform. Again this isn't secret stuff....it was all debated when they ipo'd. Noone could figure out how it was making money or how it would increase revenue; based on these same concerns.

So the only remaining source of income is from sources noone wants disclosed. Spending any time on there, and seeing what's allowed, what's blocked, who is blue checked, and who isn't - tells you exactly who's paying for the propaganda of the moment.

A great example was the recent discovery that a pro lockdown covid Dr in NYC was an entirely fake person. She was verified (which isn't an easy process) and had her content shadow promoted. Of course it was lock step with the government. That just doesn't happen by accident.

Also you can tell the other nation states who pays the bills. Anything pro china or pro Islamic state is promoted and anything to the opposite is demoted if not blocked altogether.

 

[gamecockcat]

I guess I was speaking rhetorically a bit. I was a finance major at UK. I understand how to review a publicly traded company. Btw, a balance sheet doesn't show you a lot but their financial statements do. Twitter is making a profit. Their EPS was most recently 1.13 I believe. 86% of their revenue comes from ads while 14% comes from data services for other companies. While I don't use Twitter much, I do see ads pretty much every time I'm on it. I neither trust nor like Twitter, at the moment, but much of what has been said in this thread is bordering on being a conspiracy theory.

I have no idea if the article I linked is accurate but, when an employee goes on record to say he's only working 4 hours per week and that makes him promotable, my BS detector flashes red. Either the employee is flat out lying (to what benefit for himself, I'd ask) or Twitter is a scam. I'm not on it and will never be on it. But, a public company has some government oversight (Enron, Worldcom, et al) and should be held accountable IF (and it's a big 'if') any of what the guy quoted in the article is true.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

Article about an interview with an engineer who works at Twitter and, besides his admission that Twitter is not about freedom of speech at all, the more interesting comment he had was about his 'work' schedule.

He admitted to only working 4 hours PER WEEK for quite some time and several of his colleagues have taken 'months' off for 'mental health breaks'. According to this employee, their business is not set up to make a profit. So, who/what is underwriting Twitter? It's supposedly a public corporation with a Board of Directors, etc. but employees are working one day part-time per week (the ones that bother to work at all, that is, according to this employee)? How is that even possible? Couldn't this turn into a huge scandal if Twitter turns out to be a dummy corporation for who knows what - government, political action committees, money laundering operation, etc.? It sounds far-fetched but, when an actual employee admits to a 4-hour workweek and he claims that his 'work ethic' should qualify him for a promotion, maybe the far-fetched isn't so impossible.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/twitter_does_not_believe_in_free_speech.html

People who know how to automate work can automate a lot of their work.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Do these employees get paid a full salary and benefits for 4 hours of work a week?

If so, where do I apply? Sounds like a sweet *** gig to me.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Twitter is making a profit. That's not the issue. The issue is how and where is the money coming from.

I see ads too. Everyone does. Problem with Twitter is their click ratios are exceedingly low. So people see them, they just don't drive action like they do on Facebook or ig.

The issue has always been the not so secret fact that Twitter is loaded with bots. They would never release the amount of unique users. Those two issues have long been the albatross that keeps ad buys way down on that platform. Again this isn't secret stuff....it was all debated when they ipo'd. Noone could figure out how it was making money or how it would increase revenue; based on these same concerns.

So the only remaining source of income is from sources noone wants disclosed. Spending any time on there, and seeing what's allowed, what's blocked, who is blue checked, and who isn't - tells you exactly who's paying for the propaganda of the moment.

A great example was the recent discovery that a pro lockdown covid Dr in NYC was an entirely fake person. She was verified (which isn't an easy process) and had her content shadow promoted. Of course it was lock step with the government. That just doesn't happen by accident.

Also you can tell the other nation states who pays the bills. Anything pro china or pro Islamic state is promoted and anything to the opposite is demoted if not blocked altogether.

I'm going to differ with you again. Twitter click thru rates are on par with Facebook and significantly higher than Instagram. I realize the unique user issue. That is an issue on all social platforms. For instance, because of a game I like to play, I have 5 FB accounts. That happens a lot and doesn't even take into account the bots, which are a problem.

Since I can prove the click thru rate is similar between FB and Twitter, I don't think I have to make the jump to "the only remaining source of income....".

I won't argue the last couple of points as I haven't researched them at all. I do know they like to play liberal politics here but seem to ignore the rest of the world.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I have no idea if the article I linked is accurate but, when an employee goes on record to say he's only working 4 hours per week and that makes him promotable, my BS detector flashes red. Either the employee is flat out lying (to what benefit for himself, I'd ask) or Twitter is a scam. I'm not on it and will never be on it. But, a public company has some government oversight (Enron, Worldcom, et al) and should be held accountable IF (and it's a big 'if') any of what the guy quoted in the article is true.

The marketplace should hold them accountable. Lots of these tech companies aren't like working at real jobs. They seem to value a relaxed mind more than a strong work ethic, which is just odd but if you've been around computer people, they can be pretty odd at times. I imagine the guy is exaggerating but I have no doubt Twitter is a low pressure place to work.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

I'm going to differ with you again. Twitter click thru rates are on par with Facebook and significantly higher than Instagram. I realize the unique user issue. That is an issue on all social platforms. For instance, because of a game I like to play, I have 5 FB accounts. That happens a lot and doesn't even take into account the bots, which are a problem.

Since I can prove the click thru rate is similar between FB and Twitter, I don't think I have to make the jump to "the only remaining source of income....".

I won't argue the last couple of points as I haven't researched them at all. I do know they like to play liberal politics here but seem to ignore the rest of the world.

Differ all you want. This was all out in the open when they went public. The only information favorable to them comes from them and is akin to asking the fox if the henhouse is secure.

The biggest hurdle for them in ad pricing was always proving how many unique users exist and how many actually click on ads and make purchases. This info is the very first time anyone with weight publicly challenged it. Again...the key here is he already knows they're lying. He knows because they're doing due diligence.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Differ all you want. This was all out in the open when they went public. The only information favorable to them comes from them and is akin to asking the fox if the henhouse is secure.

The biggest hurdle for them in ad pricing was always proving how many unique users exist and how many actually click on ads and make purchases. This info is the very first time anyone with weight publicly challenged it. Again...the key here is he already knows they're lying. He knows because they're doing due diligence.

Actually, that isn't true either. Advertisers can see their click thru's and can pretty easily tell if they are being lied to. I've seen this in my company's FB advertising. Yes, I agree, they are lying, yugely, about the number of unique users.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Actually, that isn't true either. Advertisers can see their click thru's and can pretty easily tell if they are being lied to. I've seen this in my company's FB advertising. Yes, I agree, they are lying, yugely, about the number of unique users.

I know they can. That's why so many were asking questions when Twitter went public. Ad buys there weren't paying off like they should've. Their monetization has never made sense.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

I'll tell you.. once you set things up from an IT standpoint.. unless you're moving onto new projects, there isn't a lot to do, aside from monitor it and if it goes down, fix it. Some people make their living off owning one system and just babysitting it.

If you check the SysAdmin subReddit, you'll find there's anywhere from 2-hour work weeks to 70-hour work weeks. Not surprised at all. Information technology is a very weird beast when it comes to jobs and work/life balance. There's really nothing to compare it to.

Back when I worked in athletics, I figured out how to automate social media graphics. All I had to do was create the template, then when I wanted to update it for the next game, I just imported the action shot and a data file (which is automatically generated either by the stat program or the athletics website) then ran one action and my graphic was done is less than a minute. If I did it manually every time it would have taken me 30 minutes minimum.

Same with editing headshots. Create the template, create an action. Run the action on the entire set of headshots for the team, done in like five minutes. To do the whole football team manually would have taken hours.

Work smarter, not harder.

 

[Ron Mehico]

Back when I worked in athletics, I figured out how to automate social media graphics. All I had to do was create the template, then when I wanted to update it for the next game, I just imported the action shot and a data file (which is automatically generated either by the stat program or the athletics website) then ran one action and my graphic was done is less than a minute. If I did it manually every time it would have taken me 30 minutes minimum.

Same with editing headshots. Create the template, create an action. Run the action on the entire set of headshots for the team, done in like five minutes. To do the whole football team manually would have taken hours.

Work smarter, not harder.

You bitched for 3 years how hard that job was and how over-worked you were

 

[Nightwish84]

I get a kick out of these cheap, random conservative websites that pop up. Here's one of the "articles" featured: https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...n_obsessively_stroking_a_child_in_public.html

Oh no, it's "Bad Touch Biden" out there stroking kids again. JFC. Hell of a news day when someone gets to write about Biden being a pedo on some janky "news" site.

Does Twitter lean left? I dunno. They allowed Trump to **** post and call people names daily until the very end of his Presidency. Some of you enjoyed the hell out of that. Some of the most popular accounts are from right wing media members (who said they were leaving Twitter after the Trump ban). If you listen to the whining on this board, you'd think the world is against one side. Twitter has become a dark web boogeyman for the right. At least you guys stopped obsessing over the Clinton's.

You're not silenced, you're not victims, and you won't be saved if Elon takes the platform over. Try just not being on Twitter instead of crying that your speech and freedoms are being taken from you. One side cries wolf, the other side cries wolf. Nothing changes.

 

[hmt5000]

Back when I worked in athletics, I figured out how to automate social media graphics. All I had to do was create the template, then when I wanted to update it for the next game, I just imported the action shot and a data file (which is automatically generated either by the stat program or the athletics website) then ran one action and my graphic was done is less than a minute. If I did it manually every time it would have taken me 30 minutes minimum.

Same with editing headshots. Create the template, create an action. Run the action on the entire set of headshots for the team, done in like five minutes. To do the whole football team manually would have taken hours.

Work smarter, not harder.

You've never owned a business have you?

 

[hmt5000]

I get a kick out of these cheap, random conservative websites that pop up. Here's one of the "articles" featured: https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...n_obsessively_stroking_a_child_in_public.html

Oh no, it's "Bad Touch Biden" out there stroking kids again. JFC. Hell of a news day when someone gets to write about Biden being a pedo on some janky "news" site.

Does Twitter lean left? I dunno. They allowed Trump to **** post and call people names daily until the very end of his Presidency. Some of you enjoyed the hell out of that. Some of the most popular accounts are from right wing media members (who said they were leaving Twitter after the Trump ban). If you listen to the whining on this board, you'd think the world is against one side. Twitter has become a dark web boogeyman for the right. At least you guys stopped obsessing over the Clinton's.

You're not silenced, you're not victims, and you won't be saved if Elon takes the platform over. Try just not being on Twitter instead of crying that your speech and freedoms are being taken from you. One side cries wolf, the other side cries wolf. Nothing changes.

So after Elon's deal was announced Ben Shapiro gained 400,000 followers. Left leaning journalist lost 65000+ followers. You can play the "tool cool for school" trope if you want but we are talking about measurable data that all points to a bias going in one direction.

Twitter wanted to make people think that leftist ideology was more popular than it was and that pubs were more hated than they were. They "allowed" Trump to **** post but they also let people openly call for violence against him... which is technically against the law.... and they let people call for the death of the Cov Cath kids...

And are you justifying how Biden always seems to inappropriately touch children? Why would a grown man touch a young girls chest in anyway especially if he isn't a close family relation and it was an accident?

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

So after Elon's deal was announced Ben Shapiro gained 400,000 followers. Left leaning journalist lost 65000+ followers. You can play the "tool cool for school" trope if you want but we are talking about measurable data that all points to a bias going in one direction.

Twitter wanted to make people think that leftist ideology was more popular than it was and that pubs were more hated than they were. They "allowed" Trump to **** post but they also let people openly call for violence against him... which is technically against the law.... and they let people call for the death of the Cov Cath kids...

And are you justifying how Biden always seems to inappropriately touch children? Why would a grown man touch a young girls chest in anyway especially if he isn't a close family relation and it was an accident?

Not just that. Very pro china and Islamic extremism as well. You can be banned for calling a girl ugly but the ayatollah, and loads of others, can freely call for death to Jews with no issue.

 

[bkingUK]

Engineer admitting to working 4 hours a week is more a sign of mismanagement and lack of assertiveness from engineer. The ability to take extended time off in tech isn’t rare. Lack of organizational efficiency is really the story here. Rest is a pretty awfully written article if we are being honest.

 

[Nightwish84]

So after Elon's deal was announced Ben Shapiro gained 400,000 followers. Left leaning journalist lost 65000+ followers. You can play the "tool cool for school" trope if you want but we are talking about measurable data that all points to a bias going in one direction.

Twitter wanted to make people think that leftist ideology was more popular than it was and that pubs were more hated than they were. They "allowed" Trump to **** post but they also let people openly call for violence against him... which is technically against the law.... and they let people call for the death of the Cov Cath kids...

And are you justifying how Biden always seems to inappropriately touch children? Why would a grown man touch a young girls chest in anyway especially if he isn't a close family relation and it was an accident?

So Twitter is a dark web boogeyman for you. Got it. Also, I'm not justifying the Biden is a pedo obsession some of you have. That's some far right wing Political Thread BS and it's beyond bizarre. Back in the day, people would just say they hate the current POTUS. Now, we've gotta write articles about them being pedophiles too. Someone's sick, and it ain't the old dude that beat your old dude.

Not just that. Very pro china and Islamic extremism as well. You can be banned for calling a girl ugly but the ayatollah, and loads of others, can freely call for death to Jews with no issue.

Point taken I guess, but the "calling a girl ugly" scenario is oddly specific and a very third grade troll scenario. Why would anyone call a girl ugly on social media? Again, oddly specific scenario there. Speaking of that, I'm not sure I buy someone getting banned for calling a girl (we talking teenage girl?) ugly either. Matt Jones posts some of the stuff he gets, from people wishing cancer on him to attacking his faith, and in every case, the person who sent the tweet ends up deleting it or their entire account themselves.

 

[AustinTXCat]

So Twitter is a dark web boogeyman for you. Got it. Also, I'm not justifying the Biden is a pedo obsession some of you have. That's some far right wing Political Thread BS and it's beyond bizarre. Back in the day, people would just say they hate the current POTUS. Now, we've gotta write articles about them being pedophiles too. Someone's sick, and it ain't the old dude that beat your old dude.

Holy ****! Are you for real?

 

[Nightwish84]

Holy ****, fine. To satisfy you and the other few nuts here - the guy who beat your guy is a pedophile. Lock him up and such! Outrage! YouTube videos! This is not normal! Alerts and whatnot!

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

You bitched for 3 years how hard that job was and how over-worked you were

Yeah, and I was still working 60 hours a week. Had to start automating **** so I could do all the other stuff they wanted me to do unless I wanted to start working 70 hours a week.

One of the best decisions I ever made to leave that career field. Now I work less than 40 hours a week, zero night and weekend hours, much less stressful job, make more money, and have better and drastically cheaper benefits.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

So after Elon's deal was announced Ben Shapiro gained 400,000 followers. Left leaning journalist lost 65000+ followers. You can play the "tool cool for school" trope if you want but we are talking about measurable data that all points to a bias going in one direction.

Which proves nothing. Musk still doesn't actually own Twitter, maybe never will since he keeps making up excuses to try to back out of the deal. None of the changes he wants to do has been implemented. People joined or left because of the potential of what Twitter would become in a few months once Musk actually owns Twitter.

 

[P19978]

Near as I can tell TWTR's business model is nothing but claiming a high number of users but in reality nothing but a bunch of bots.

 

[bkingUK]

This is what is annoying about political pundits. The article posted is awful. I don't see how it's defensible. But apparently agreeing with the sentiment means facts are thrown out.

The author's only exit from this hackjob is claiming it's an "opinion piece". If you read the article critically there are many illogical fallacies. The first sentence sets the stage for the article. Author immediately appeals to groupthink to persuade agreement. "Every conservative knows" he says. Yeesh. Let me come back to that.

Author then goes on to suggest the US government owns Twitter because according to a random engineer "Twitter doesn't care about money."

I've worked with private equity, VC, many Silicon Valley types. I've been an engineer for most of my career. And what is really being exhibited here is the engineer not understanding Twitter's business model (which isn't uncommon for engineers more concerned about tech) and a writer, who quite honestly lacks credibility and writes like a message board poster.

Twitter's gross profit from 3/31/2021 - 3/31/2022 was $3.31B, a 33.74% increase year over year. Musk offered a $44 billion of remaining shares for control of the company. I think if you are saying Twitter doesn't care about money that you're missing a pretty big piece of the puzzle.

Now, let's come back to the idea that "every conservative knows that Twitter does not believe in free speech." This statement is incredibly revealing of how shallow of a article this is (which is ironic considering it's on AmericanThinker.com). Let me explain why.

1. Just like Rivals.com, Twitter allows speech with in boundaries dictated by company policy. If that policy is unconstitutional, sue them. Except you'll lose. Why? Because they aren't your servers and you have no constitutional right to use their servers. Free speech does not exist in the vacuum of Twitter.
2. Assuming every human on earth owned their own Twitter, free speech still has limitations. There are certain things we cannot say.
3. The precedent it would set for the government to "regulate free speech" (an oxy-moron) is not a conservative idea. That is big government. What happened to small government conservatives? You have no god given right to post on Twitter. Good god.

Im done ranting now

 

[bkingUK]

One more rant. If, say in 1998, some message board poster said they were going to sue AOL.com because a post was taken down they would've been laughed off the internet. It's a ridiculous idea because it's frivolous. Somewhere along the line the lines between internet and real life blurred.n So much so that there are even certain people claiming "Twitter is a utility." I have never seen so much respect for a web application than claiming it's so crucial that "it's a utility." Never mind that any human with an IQ over 100 can make their own website, it's that Twitter is popular, so it MUST be THAT website that the government must seize and control.

Ironically, Russia agrees. Their takeover of VK (The Russian Facebook) followed this exact line of thinking.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

Just an FYI, here is a good writeup on how Twitter makes money

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/120114/how-does-twitter-twtr-make-money.asp

The TL;DR
Twitter divides its revenue into two categories: the sale of advertising services, which constitutes the vast majority of the company's revenue, and data licensing and other services.

Advertising services generated $4.5 billion, or about 89%, of Twitter's revenue in FY 2021. Twitter generates most of its advertising revenue by selling promoted products, including Promoted Ads and Twitter Amplify, Follower Ads, and Twitter Takeover, to advertisers.

Over 11% of Twitter's revenue in FY 2021, or $571.8 million, was from data licensing and other sources. Twitter also sells data licenses that enable its data partners to access and analyze historical and real-time data on the company's platform. The "other sources" included service fees from a service they sold at the beginning of 2022.