Mainstream media reporters’ latest strategy to smear Elon Musk for his takeover of Twitter is accusing him of attacking and harassing employees because he critiqued their professional behavior on the social media site.
Prominent tech journalists saw Musk tweets disagreeing with or questioning how business at the company had been run in the past on Tuesday and were alarmed.
Musk responded to commentators’ claims that two specific Twitter employees had engaged in inappropriate behavior, indicating that he agreed.
After podcast host Saagar Enjeti tweeted that Vijaya Gadde – a Twitter executive who played a role in censoring The New York Post Hunter Biden story – was "very upset about the [Elon Musk] takeover," Musk responded that the censorship of the story was "obviously incredibly inappropriate."
In another instance, Musk responded to a tweet drawing his attention to the claim that now-Twitter lawyer Jim Baker "facilitated fraud" because "when general counsel of the FBI, [Baker] personally arranged a meeting between the FBI and Michael Sussmann. In this meeting, Sussmann presented fabricated evidence in the Alfa bank matter."
Musk replied, "Sounds pretty bad …"
Both replies drew the ire of several concerned reporters.
Financial Times technology correspondent Dave Lee blamed Musk for hateful tweets Gadde received, tweeting, "Moments after @elonmusk publicly criticised the work of Twitter policy exec @vijaya, her mentions are full of hateful tweets. Is this how he plans to run the company?"
Washington Post tech correspondent Elizabeth Dwoskin claimed in a piece published Wednesday Musk "targeted specific Twitter executives."
She wrote his tweets "reveal the chaos — and potential harm — that can ensue when the incoming owner of a company amplifies criticism of workers there."
In addition, she fretted, "Personal attacks from Musk are a nightmare scenario for Twitter employees" and claimed that he "used his powerful Twitter account to bolster right-wing users who sharply criticized two company executives, exposing them to the online masses who joined in the attacks."
On Twitter, Washington Post technology news analysis writer Will Oremus painted Musk’s comments in a dark light, tweeting, "Imagine getting up and going to work in the morning for a company whose new owner is systematically attacking your colleagues for his 84 million followers, in public, on the site you work for—and knowing you might be next."
"This is the worst-case scenario Twitter employees feared," Oremus added.
He claimed, "Elon Musk has now publicly agreed with and amplified criticisms from the right of two individual Twitter employees today— one accusing its top policy exec of ‘censorship’ and the other accusing a company lawyer of facilitating fraud."
The Washington Post's Taylor Lorenz shared Oremus’ tweet accusing Musk of having "amplified criticism" of the Twitter employees, and commented, "Another example of Musk using his platform to drive hate and harassment to another Twitter employee."
Another Washington Post tech reporter, Drew Harwell, responded to Oremus’ tweet by pointing to a highlighted portion of the alleged merger agreement between Musk and Twitter that said the "Equity Investor" can tweet about the merger "so long as such Tweets do not disparage the Company or any of its Representatives."
He commented that Musk’s tweets seem to violate that portion: "Seems, I dunno, disparage-y?"
Axios business editor Dan Primack made the same point. Sharing the same screenshot tweet of the document, he stated, "There's an argument to be made that Musk already violated this part of the agreement, by his tweet today about [Vijaya Gadde] and the NY Post story."