Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Businesses Social Networks Politics

Major Republican Donor Seeks Ouster of Twitter's CEO (reuters.com) 164

Posted by EditorDavid from the activist-investors dept.
Jack Dorsey co-founded Twitter in 2006, coding up the first prototype (with the help of a contractor) when he was still in his 20s. Dorsey's now it's CEO -- but "A major Republican donor has purchased a stake in Twitter and is reportedly seeking to oust him," reports the Guardian.

Bloomberg News first reported that Elliott Management has taken a "sizable stake" and "and plans to push for changes at the social media company, including replacing Dorsey". Paul Singer, the billionaire founder of Elliott Management, is a Republican mega-donor who opposed Donald Trump during the real-estate magnate's run for the presidential nomination but has since come onside...

Elliott Management is an activist investor, which means it regularly pushes for change in companies in which it buys shares.
Gizmodo referred to them as "hedge fund goons". But Reuters adds that Twitter "is one of the few U.S. technology companies headed, but not controlled, by one of its founders.

"It has given shareholders equal voting rights, making Dorsey, who owns only about 2% of the company, vulnerable to a challenge from an activist investor..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Major Republican Donor Seeks Ouster of Twitter's CEO More

Major Republican Donor Seeks Ouster of Twitter's CEO

Comments Filter:

  • I've often wondered if the bias model is inherently more successful, so if this happens I hope the company moves more towards free expression ( ditching things like shadow bans and the like along the way ), if only as a contrast.

    • Re:Would be interesting to see (Score:4, Insightful)

      by DogDude ( 805747 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @07:59PM (#59785496)
      There have been right wing versions of every social media platform out there for some time. They're all failures, because they just get crap flooded with garbage, and nobody with a brain wants to wade through that.

      • I wonder if it's an interia situation; are twitter/reddit/facebook/ect..so successful because they built their following in their respective formats first? Is that why challengers can't create the userbase necessary to become successful?

        Or is it something inherent to the bias each platform displays? Or even more; is their bias a result of their success? Did they change to chase the dollar, and those cumulative changes perceived as bias?

        Like I said; it'll be interesting to see what happens.

        • Twitter paid millions and millions of dollars, month after month, for years, to be mentioned on television frequently. To be part of how the news is told, how entertainment is explained, etc.

          Competitors with ideological bones to pick are not going to have or attract enough money to compete with actual business.

        • Its because with freedom of speech comes trolling, and too much of that drives reasonable people away.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by cusco ( 717999 )

            With any luck they'll a appoint Boeing's ex-CEO and let him drive it into bankruptcy.

      • Re:Would be interesting to see (Score:4, Informative)

        by Jarwulf ( 530523 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:27PM (#59785552)
        The majority of nonpoliticized alternate platforms don't succeed either, ie whens the last time you heard of citizenopedia?. Its because of inertia not politics or lack thereof. Also it doesn't help that conservatives are told to build their own platform and are then sabotaged when they try to do it. Voat is DDOSed all the time and platforms like Gab and other sites have had their payment processors and means of funding targeted and are kicked off of App stores etc.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by quax ( 19371 )

          It's not the conservatives that get platforms like Gab in trouble but the racists and nazis.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Anonymous Coward

            That's a fair point. It's not the conservatives that give the Republican Party a bad name, either. It's the fundamentalists.

        • Also it doesn't help that conservatives are told to build their own platform and are then sabotaged when they try to do it. Voat is DDOSed all the time and platforms like Gab and other sites have had their payment processors and means of funding targeted and are kicked off of App stores etc.

          Look, I'm not conservative and certainly not a Conservative, but wow you clearly really hate conservatives. If you think Voat and Gab are representative of conservatives than frankly you have a lower opinion of them than

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by guruevi ( 827432 )

        Such as...? There sure are various alternative sites where alt-right (alternatives to the conservative right) tend to congregate. But I'm not sure we've seen conservative social media except for some directed specifically at specific religious/Christian denominations.

        • But I'm not sure we've seen conservative social media [...]

          Well, no. Actual conservative media (e.g. The Economist) uses mainstream social media without issue.

          • The Economist thought Boris was too extreme. And he's not trying to dismantle the NHS or strengthen freedom of speech, to my knowledge.

            • Well, yes. Almost all conservative economists thought Brexit was a terrible idea. They still do.

      • Twitter isn't flooded with garbage?

      • Right, I mean it's not like they regularly get dehosted and have payments transfers banned or anything.

      • All alternative versions of the major social media platforms have failed since Twitter and Facebook came on the scene about 20 years ago. The closest that anyone has come was WhatsApp and Facebook paid billions of dollars to buy them and make sure it didn't disrupt their business model.

        TikTok is the second closest and that has the direct backing of a $75 Billion dollar company with significant financial and resource backing by the Chinese government. I'm not really sure you can call either one of those soci

    • Jack Dorsey needs to go, but not because he is a biased liberal. He really has run out of steam. Twitter is not growing and needs some fresh vision to see if they can find how to expand and grow. If this guy is buying into Twitter due to wanting to end it's political interference policies he could be onto something new with respect to investing. With Steyer (I think Steyer is out actually) and Bloomberg having big budgets possibly they will want to buy bigger positions in Twitter creating a huge stock pric

      • Re:Would be interesting to see (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:43PM (#59785580)

        I think Steyer is out actually

        Yes, Tom Steyer quit today. He went all-in on SC and came in a distant 3rd. He had no realistic path to the nomination.

        Pete Buttigieg also quit today. He was 4th in SC. Unlike Steyer, he is young enough to have a bright future in politics.

        The race is now down to Sanders, Biden, Bloomberg, and a rabble of no-hopers.

        Super Tuesday is the day after tomorrow.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          The interesting thing about South Carolina, I would bet dimes to dollars, postal votes hugely, absolutely hugely favoured Biden, whilst in person voting favoured Sanders. How did not even know they were voting, oh yeah. Watch out for postal votes, the establishment will cheat.

        • Pete Buttigieg also quit today.

          Some of these people who are fighting an uphill battle sometimes quit strategically - they can't win the nomination, so they quit ahead of Super Tuesday and hope to maneuver for the vice-presidential section.

          With two rather old guys being the most likely candidates for the nomination, whomever is the VP choice might have a decent chance of making president (if they beat Trump). Heck, Pence might have that in the back of his mind as well, given that Trump is not exactly a spring chicken nor in particularly g

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by cusco ( 717999 )

        Twitter is not growing and needs some fresh vision to see if they can find how to expand and grow.

        Why? Can't we just let it go the way of Myspace and Napster? It was cute and marginally innovative for a while, but really, it's not the place for any discussion more serious than the recipe for a sandwich.

    • Re:Would be interesting to see (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jarwulf ( 530523 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:41PM (#59785578)
      There is nothing to indicate that the 'bias model' is inherently more successful. Up until recently the Internet was the Wild West and you can't say that period was unsuccessful. Its only with the consolidation and centralization of power into the hands mostly of megacorps in one of the most leftwing areas in the country and the clampdown by government authorities did you start to see this uniformly progressive bent on all major platforms. What you can say based on the evidence is that progressives tend to thrive in the controlled mainstream arenas as the major subs on Reddit and Twitter are dominated by liberals while smaller/less moderated places like 4chan and independent sites tend to be where conservatives and rightwingers thrive.

      • There is nothing to indicate that the 'bias model' is inherently more successful.

        A bias model chases away some customers, who then participate in other systems. In effect, it's reducing your userbase.

        A good example of this is CNN, which used to be a highly rated news source, but is now a distant *third* [thehill.com] behind Fox news (first) and MSNBC (second)(*).

        So there's a rationale and a clear evidence-by-example of how a bias model is less successful than a fair model.

        (*) From the linked article:

        In prime time, Fox News finished first with an average of 2.4 million viewers. In April 2018, the network also averaged 2.4 million viewers, according to Nielsen.

        MSNBC was second with an average of 1.66 million viewers, down from 1.93 million in April 2018.

        CNN was third with 767,000 average primetime viewers, down from 1.04 million in April 2018.

      • According to conservatives, the bias model is successful, It won the free market.

    • is a regular run of the mill Establishment Bias like you see on CNN & MSNBC, where the bias is in favor of existing systems and entrenched interests. You'll still have just as many shadow bans and the like, if not more.

    • Free expression is overrated. Really anything with the label "free" never achieves what it's proponents believe it will. Those systems are usually pretty quickly overwhelmed by the loudest voices, the least scruples, the most money, etc. Human societal interactions require rules in order to stave off tyranny by the bullies of the world.

      • True, but "free" in this case would mean giving the users control over content they're exposed to, and not the central company.

        I would like to see what a 'light' touch from a company would do to an established company with a large user base.

        • Reddit. The actual company doesn't moderate anyone. That's the sub moderators jobs. The only thing they actually do towards users is quarantining subs. But you can still go there without issue. But even reddit is falling prey to brigaders. The ability to keep generating accounts makes blocking trolls a moot point sometimes.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Hodr ( 219920 )

            They remove entire subs that aren't doing anything illegal. They may be distastful, but in many cases they no more break the community standards than hundreds or thousands of other subs.

            Thats definitely moderating.

        • You pretty much have this, its called Facebook.

  • Dorsey the Square (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rmdingler ( 1955220 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @07:59PM (#59785500) Journal

    In addition to his paltry 2% stock shareholdings, his (at times) questionable leadership of Twitter has made him an easy target.

    More interestingly, the rich and powerful who wish to control the narrative are better served buying up social media companies than traditional news outlets.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Cederic ( 9623 )

      That's partly because the traditional news reporting organisations now drive much of their content from social media.

      The BBC in the UK for instance seem as incapable as the Labour Party of understanding that Twitter is not representative of the country as a whole. It reflects their own views back at them so they think these are normal and that anybody disagreeing is an ignorant outlier.

      This has been shown repeatedly over the last 3-4 years, resulting in increasing mistrust in the BBC, as they demonstrably d

  • Republicans have pretty much given up trying to win voters with their superior ideas, innovation, and leadership, and better government.

    Now it is all about suppressing votes of people who don't like them, controlling information people see, appealing to white nationalist, lying their f***ing heads off about pretty much everything they are doing.

    Case in point this article: They want to use their financial muscle tilt all social media they can in their favored direction. And this they aren't even tryin

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:33PM (#59785562)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Zumbs ( 1241138 )

        I've seen the tech world move from libertarians to leftists. Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Reddit constantly shadow ban and censor conservative content.

        Have you stopped for a moment and considered the business model of those companies that you mention?

        It is based on having a product that the vast majority of people like using, preferably with other people. And they are international. So they really, really need to create an atmosphere that is welcoming, regardless of ethnicity, language, sexuality, gender and so on. Various forms of racism, misogyny, homophobia and other types of hate speech are quite simply a thread to their business model. Thus, they try

        • ... and universal healthcare, you will see that they are not.

          I don't get why corporations aren't strongly in favor of universal healthcare. If that existed, they could stop paying for their employees' health care.

    • Democrats have pretty much given up trying to win voters with their superior ideas, innovation, and leadership, and better government.

      Now it is all about buying votes of people who don't like them, controlling information people see with biased media, appealing to racist socialists and progressives, lying their f***ing heads off about pretty much everything they are doing.

      Case in point this article: They want to use their financial muscle in tech and Hollywood to tilt all social media they can in their favo

    • Re:This is a pretty significant reveal actually (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ashthon ( 5513156 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:57PM (#59785624)

      Now it is all about suppressing votes of people who don't like them, controlling information people see

      Classic case of projection. You're accusing the right of doing what the left are already doing via Google, Twitter, Youtube etc. Now you're upset when somebody tries to use the same tools against you. Perhaps the left should have considered this possibility when you engaged mass suppression of right wing opinions, labelling every conservative viewpoint as "hate speech." Censorship is never a good idea because it invariably ends up being used against the censors. Welcome to the world you've created.

      They want to use their financial muscle tilt all social media they can in their favored direction.

      Oh look, more projection. Major technology companies, such as Google, have been using their financial muscle to push a left wing agenda. Major media companies, such as Disney, have effectively been commandeered by the left and are using their financial muscle to push a left wing agenda. In October 2017 George Soros transferred $18billion to his Open Society Foundations, using his financial muscle to push a left wing agenda. The left has been using it's financial muscle to push its agenda for decades. Now, when there's one case of the reverse possibly happening, you scream injustice. What a hypocrite.

      The Republicans are in a good position to retake the house and retain the senate and the presidency. If that happens you can look forward to a much needed realignment. From the recent panels at CPAC, it looks like fixing the bias at the technology and social media companies will be a high priority. We might finally get to hear both sides of the argument, and you're clearly not happy about that.

      • Classic case of projection

        You can't win every argument by drooling "herp derp projection" when the actual facts are against you. Voter suppression, actually real voter suppression (not the "omg I got banned from twitter for facts about the (((illuminati)))") one but the ones where people are heavily penalised for trying to use the polls, prevented from using them and gerrymandering are by and large a Republican game.

    • Republicans have pretty much given up trying to win voters with their superior ideas, innovation, and leadership, and better government.

      Let's wait for November and see how many voters have been won by the current administration, shall we?

      I've never seen such complete derangement in people in my entire lifetime.

      Our country is doing better than in 2016 by every measurable statistic, but to hear dems tell it we've done everything wrong in every possible way since the election.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by barakn ( 641218 )

        Every measurable statistic? So the fact that the federal debt has increased by $3 trillion is "doing better?"

  • Party of Business (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mapkinase ( 958129 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:15PM (#59785530) Homepage Journal

    I wonder why Republicans did not try it earlier.

    The domination of left-wing new tech is annoying.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I wonder why Republicans did not try it earlier.

      The domination of left-wing new tech is annoying.

      They have tried. Rupert Murdoch bought MySpace and immediately turned it into a steaming pile of shit. Now Facebook has struck an alliance with Trump to get him and his Republicans re-elected. It'll be fun to watch how that ends, specifically whether Facebook, having dethroned Fox News as the new hub of conservative propaganda, can turn into an even bigger and smellier shit pile that it already is. If Twitter gets bought out by a Republican donor and follows MySpace and Facebook down the toilet like all oth

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by geek ( 5680 )

        I wonder why Republicans did not try it earlier.

        The domination of left-wing new tech is annoying.

        They have tried. Rupert Murdoch bought MySpace and immediately turned it into a steaming pile of shit. Now Facebook has struck an alliance with Trump to get him and his Republicans re-elected. It'll be fun to watch how that ends, specifically whether Facebook, having dethroned Fox News as the new hub of conservative propaganda, can turn into an even bigger and smellier shit pile that it already is. If Twitter gets bought out by a Republican donor and follows MySpace and Facebook down the toilet like all other conservative attempts to dominate the tech sector I'll be throwing a party to celebrate.

        Murdoch is an avid leftist Clinton supporter. Has been since the 90's. Just because he owns a controlling stake in Foxnews does not make him a right winger.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @08:24PM (#59785546)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • At the very least don't give up controlling equity w/o going public....

      A friend of ours sold 51% to VCs who could then basically steal the rest, since you can't live off 49% of something generating no income and can't sell it either.

  • Would be fun to see (Score:2, Interesting)

    by melted ( 227442 )

    Would be fun to see liberals purged from the platform. They're currently in support of purging people they disagree with. Give them taste of their own medicine.

  • From Politico [politico.com]:

    Hedge fund magnate Paul Singer was so anti-Trump before the 2016 election that he helped bankroll a political action committee dedicated to closing off the reality TV star’s path to the presidency. Trump said at a news conference that there was a “lotta controversy” surrounding the billionaire and attacked Singer’s stance on immigration.

    But at the Lotte New York Palace Hotel in midtown this May, Singer amicably chatted with the president and a dozen other high-dollar do

  • Um, yeah (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Sunday March 01, 2020 @10:03PM (#59785792) Journal
    That would be just awful if big tech company honchos got ousted for their political views [theatlantic.com]. Right?

  • Gizmondo's opinion doesn't matter (Score:3)

    by MSTCrow5429 ( 642744 ) on Monday March 02, 2020 @01:16AM (#59786124)

    Unserious people whining again. We know their position, and it's "you can't do that because we don't like it!"

  • I hope current management gets pushed out. Twitter survives DESPITE it’s leadership, not because of it.

  • Didn't that already happen? Who still reads twitter? Its just an open cesspit of racism, misogyny and outright stupidly.

      I can't think of a better group to pilot the ship than the Trumpist Republican party.

    Good luck with that.

Slashdot Top Deals

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Close