Do you think Elon's latest antics socially have a strategic purpose (being provocative and then scoring account interaction by sentiment) or is he being impulsive?
I think his public facing actions in person, on social media and as reported in the media are not the full story.
Have you ever seen a politician pivot abruptly on a topic? Why do they so quickly change what their influence is to the public? What are they saying in private? Remember Lindsay Graham pivot in a divot on the golf course with Trump? Or John Boehner pivot from conservative to cannabis king?
Politicians are all actors. They are masters at communicating anything and everything. The topic they communicate changes based on what it is they are supposed to achieve.
Social media/media is the same. You see topics getting pushed depending on what someone who controls those media sources wants to achieve.
Advertisers, PR firms, Marketers are masters at attaining these outcomes for $$$$. The media takes $$$$ to do it. The people paying the $$$ want something.
So you can quickly see the Ad/PR messages in media and soc media for what they are. It's why we have huge political division, yet 70-80% of USA actually broadly agrees on things.
The folks who pay to basically manipulate for their gain are quite well discovered lately. OIl/Gas/Utilities did it for decades. A LOT. Political organizations did it. First, Obama win was credited to his digital strategy. MAGA was more malicious, not only using but abusing digital media. The use of fakery and tracking of the responses was new. And it really worked. Who was the buyer of this outcome? We know it was Russia, China, Mercer, Thiel, Bannon, etc. The next buyers were basically EVERYONE because it worked.
Elon used this system to his advantage, and didn't even need traditional advertising. Now, Automotive industry has started to use the fakery system too.
So all of these parties are really complicit, all benefit financially. Many whistleblowers in media and soc media have detailed how this has and continues to work.
Jack Dorsey knew this, and fought his board about it. In 2020, TWTR stopped selling ads for "influcence". But if you read about what they stopped...they coyly define "ads". Their revenue went from $1B to -$1B in 2020. Jack publicly stated that TWTR should not be an advertising platform. Musk agreed. Parag/Board did not.
Those who used TWTR as part of their fakery scheme NEEDED it. The fight about Elon buying it was about what changes he would endorse for Jack, and what he would maintain for the advantage of those who still needed influence. COULD THE NEW OWNER make changes that benefit on purchasing group over the other?
Who is Musk beholden to? He doesn't have the power in a vacuum. He has upset many, many industries while benefitting others who geopolitically benefit from his disruptions too. Weird alliances. He has the only foreign owned private factory in China? How???? Tesla vertically integrated: this took a lot of material resources and guaranteed contracts. How did they do this when others are so far behind? What were those deals? These types of information are HIGHLY private and secured, we can't really know.
But we know that the Saudi's were the ones named as funding taking Tesla private. We know some of their involvement in Tesla, TWTR. We know of the ties between QIF to many of the same investments. We know the ties of both to MAGA actions in the Trump era. We know the history of the global oil empires and corporations, the role of the Petrodollar.
SO if very wealthy, powerful entities need the fakery machines...they will pay a lot to own or influence them. That $$$ is all over Silicon Valley.
Knowing this, how do you really vet what Musk says in regards to his personal beliefs? You can't. You just can't.
I no longer trust a thing he tweets. I have to look for corroboration about what he says in regards to his companies. I have to research with the media or soc media is "saying" about all of it. I find many disparities and concerns.
