Mark Zuckerberg, also known as the ‘Twitter Killer’, entangled in a media frenzy alongside Elon Musk

The mainstream media and their liberal allies have found an unlikely ally in Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, whom they used to despise. However, their newfound support for Zuckerberg is not out of love for him but rather out of their intense dislike for Twitter’s owner, Elon Musk.

These two tech billionaires are engaged in a bizarre feud that includes talk of a real-life cage match. But what truly captures the attention of journalists is the battle between Meta’s social media operation, Threads, and Twitter.

The media and the left have been on a crusade against Musk ever since he expressed interest in acquiring Twitter. They have tried everything to annihilate their hated rival but to no avail. The Washington Post proclaimed that “millions await platform’s collapse,” while Vanity Fair and The Atlantic predicted the demise of Twitter at the hands of Musk.

However, none of these doomsday scenarios materialized. The reason behind the media’s hostility is simple: censorship. The left craves it desperately, while Musk is generally supportive of free speech, despite his imperfections.

ELON MUSK ESCALATES ATTACKS ON ZUCKERBERG WITH PERSONAL INSULTS OVER THREADS APP

Of course, journalists continue to criticize Musk aggressively. In fact, NBC News reporter Ben Collins, who covers the “dystopia beat,” was temporarily suspended for his relentless bashing of Musk. Collins’ comments were deemed “not editorially appropriate” by NBC and MSNBC, leading to his removal from covering Musk.

It seems that journalists are infatuated with Twitter in the same way a jilted lover obsesses over an ex-. They can’t help but constantly write, talk, and complain about Twitter. If Musk could gather all the commentary about the alleged demise of Twitter, he could probably walk to Mars without needing a rocket.

But the media’s fixation with Twitter goes beyond mere obsession. With each new social media platform, the press sharpens its claws and targets Musk once again. CNN couldn’t have been more explicit on July 9th when it published an article titled “Tired of Elon Musk? Here are the Twitter alternatives you should know about,” listing Bluesky, Mastodon, Spill, and Threads (Spill being an invite-only platform targeting the Black Twitter audience).

CNN was not alone in attacking Twitter to promote Threads. The Washington Post declared, “Threads had big launch energy. Twitter is under pressure,” while The New York Times reported on “How Meta did what no other Twitter competitor could.” The Times even compared Twitter to a bad boyfriend in one of its headlines, and hailed Threads as “Instagram’s ‘Twitter Killer.'”

A similar pattern emerged when competitor Mastodon targeted Twitter. The Washington Post announced, “Musk is wrecking speech moderation on Twitter. There’s an alternative.” It’s quite ironic for a newspaper that proudly proclaims “Democracy Dies in Darkness” to describe free speech in such detrimental terms.

The New York Times also included Mastodon in an article titled “Twitter’s Rivals Try to Capitalize on Musk-Induced Chaos.”

And let’s not forget that just two months ago, the Times questioned whether Bluesky could be the long-awaited successor to Twitter. One of the aspects the Times admired about Bluesky was its ability to block large groups of people. For instance, if the ACLU created “a list of hate groups,” Bluesky users could simply block all accounts on that list.

Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk (Getty Images)

And now, the focus has shifted to Threads and Zuckerberg. The loyalty of liberals is certainly fleeting.

Yet, it seems that their hopes will be dashed once again. Casey Newton, co-host of the Times’ “Hard Fork” podcast, suggested that many social media apps are centered around “warfare” or “a battleground.” However, Threads CEO Adam Mosseri, who also leads Instagram, envisions Threads as a “less angry place for conversations.” Furthermore, Mosseri has no interest in promoting politics, unlike Twitter, which thrives on it. He stated, “Politics and hard news are inevitably going to show up on Threads—they have on Instagram as well to some extent—but we’re not going to do anything to encourage those verticals,” according to the Daily Beast.

If Mosseri’s intentions are genuine, it spells trouble for journalists who are primarily concerned with politics. For the mainstream media, social media serves as a tool to enforce conformity to their preferred narratives. With a fiercely independent Twitter, attention is diverted to topics like actor Jim Caviezel’s new movie “Sound of Freedom” instead of launching incessant attacks.

While Threads may attract a significant number of Instagram users, over 100 million so far, it won’t replace Twitter as the go-to platform for political discussions. In that regard, it resembles the censorship prevalent on Facebook. (Threads comes with an additional inconvenience – if you want to quit, you must deactivate your Instagram account. It’s like the “Hotel California” of social media sites.)

Regardless of how hard the left-leaning press wishes for Twitter’s demise, they can’t ignore the truth. As even the Washington Post admits, “Download. Scroll. Post. Repeat. New social media apps are exhausting us.” If it exhausts employees of the Post, one can only imagine how regular people feel about it.

Threads may capture and retain some users, but will it harm Twitter, or will it end up cannibalizing Facebook and Instagram? If Threads fails to eliminate Twitter, you can be sure that journalists will be back promoting the next alternative.

Overall, the future of the social media landscape remains uncertain. One thing is clear, though. The battle between Musk, Zuckerberg, and the platforms they represent continues to captivate the media and the public.