The tech mogul recently doubled down on his stance regarding the platform formerly known as Twitter. He made it crystal clear: preserving free expression was the driving force behind the acquisition, not profit maximization. "My commitment to the First Amendment remains unwavering," he stated, adding that financial sacrifice is a price worth paying for that principle. It's a bold declaration in an era where monetization often trumps ideology. Whether this philosophy will reshape social platforms long-term? That's the billion-dollar question everyone's asking.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
6 Likes
Reward
6
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
DEXRobinHood
· 5h ago
To put it nicely, it's called conviction; to put it bluntly, it's just burning money. Let's see how long it can last.
View OriginalReply0
NeonCollector
· 14h ago
Hey, freedom of speech sounds nice, but what about the money?
View OriginalReply0
memecoin_therapy
· 12-05 22:09
Hi, to be honest, I'm a bit tired of hearing this kind of talk over and over again.
View OriginalReply0
RebaseVictim
· 12-05 22:08
Sounds nice, but when it comes to actually making money, they still end up fleecing the newcomers.
View OriginalReply0
GreenCandleCollector
· 12-05 22:06
Freedom of speech vs making money, can't we have the best of both worlds?
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWitch
· 12-05 21:54
It sounds nice, but in the end, you still have to find ways to make money. The ideal is rich, but reality is harsh.
View OriginalReply0
DeFiDoctor
· 12-05 21:53
The consultation records show that this big shot’s “idealism” has some questionable clinical manifestations... They claim to give up profit for freedom, but why are the liquidity indicators still flowing out? It’s recommended to regularly review ledger data—don’t just listen to stories.
The tech mogul recently doubled down on his stance regarding the platform formerly known as Twitter. He made it crystal clear: preserving free expression was the driving force behind the acquisition, not profit maximization. "My commitment to the First Amendment remains unwavering," he stated, adding that financial sacrifice is a price worth paying for that principle. It's a bold declaration in an era where monetization often trumps ideology. Whether this philosophy will reshape social platforms long-term? That's the billion-dollar question everyone's asking.