My main point was that an acquistion of Twitter by Disney would go against all of their corporate and brand values, and not just because of the toxicity of the brand. Disney runs a tight ship (sometimes too tight, esp. in the IP department), for example, while Twitter is run by a bunch of serial screw-ups. Also, Disney sticks to the middle of the road politically (ABC News is about as “edgy” as it gets in that regard – CNN is owned by AT&T/Time-Warner), where Twitter entertains extreme views on both sides as its deranged form of “centrism”.
So yes, Twitter is a wash at best when it comes to toxicity. Any of the progressive movements you mention would have found platforms and the equivalent of hashtags if Twitter didn’t exist, and Dorsey seems to think that it’s only fair to give Gamergators a platform if MeToo gets one, and to give white supremacists a chance to be heard if BLM does. And then there’s their number 1 user (usually doing a number 2 in the Oval Office’s bathroom while he tweets at 3AM).
It’s a rubbish platform in a different way that Facebook is a rubbish platform. The sooner they both go away – I hope to be replaced by federated, decentralised platforms that no-one can acquire – the better.
