8 ms·

Or more to the point, with how much of twitter is owned by the Saudi government? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/28/saudis-kingdom-holding-company-to-ma

by KZerda 3y ago

Or more to the point, with how much of twitter is owned by the Saudi government? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/28/saudis-kingdom-holding-company-to-maintain-twitter-stake https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/28/saudis-kingdom-hol...

rjzzleep 3y ago
[flagged]
- Teever 3y ago
  People did care, and probably tried to tell you, but you probably weren't paying attention.
Jenepas 3y ago
[flagged]
- passwordoops 3y ago
  Ok, so to amend OP's original point: Should Twitter come with a label as "state-owned" considering both the Qatari and Saudi governments hold a significant stake in the company?
  - Jenepas 3y ago
    Personally yes, when i hear everyone clamour for transparency, I want brutal honest transparency, so yes twitter handle and twitter docs should clearly mention that they are owned by Saudia and terrorist Qatar. Same with DW News, Al Jazeera, Middle East eye and Gulf news. I've always wondered, without pure transparency, who will guard the guards?
    - rys 3y ago
      Isn’t DW state-owned by Germany?
    - EntrePrescott 3y ago
      At least DW is totally transparent about it. A quick look at their web site gives you that info immediately. The info page about it even figures as one of the top Questions in their FAQ: "DW is Germany’s international broadcaster. It is organized under public law and funded by the German federal tax budget." https://corporate.dw.com/en/what-kind-of-company-is-deutsche-welle/a-3252998 https://corporate.dw.com/en/what-kind-of-company-is-deutsche... "DW is financed via funding from the state, i.e. from tax revenue. This is in contrast to the domestic public channels, which are funded via broadcasting fees." https://corporate.dw.com/en/who-finances-deutsche-welle/a-36767785 https://corporate.dw.com/en/who-finances-deutsche-welle/a-36...
  - v0idzer0 3y ago
    Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. Why is everyone having such a hard to grokking this
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. “A platform” is just an internet term for a kind of publisher (roughly corresponding to “an online publisher who mostly publishes things for which it is – or would be, if it was operating in the US – protected from the liability usually attached to publishers via DMCA section 230.”)
    - passwordoops 3y ago
      A) I never said Twitter should be labelled a state-owned news company, just whether it should be labelled state-owned. B) Twitter (like all "platforms") holds the ability to control the flow of information. The moment a "platform" puts their finger on the scales and blocks certain types of legal information from being discovered (as they did last week in blocking substack links, for example) then they forfeit their claim to being a "platform" and should be treated as media distribution companies. As such they should be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as news organizations should be
- jacooper 3y ago
  Wait what? Terrorist? Al-jazeera is one of the most renowned news agencies in the world, finally giving an honest voice to the Arab and Islamic world, and they can do this because they don't rely on pleasing advertisers. What do you mean by anti-sentitic?
  - Jenepas 3y ago
    Jesus have you seen Al Jazeera covering how Qatar has been known to be a permissive environment for terror financing, reportedly funding U.S. designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as Hamas, Al qaeda and ISIS, as well as several extremist groups operating in Syria. At least one high-ranking Qatari official provided support to the mastermind of the 9/11. Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, also made Doha his headquarters for years while the Qatari's--with the Qatari's Government support and even the Muslim Brotherhood has received significant support from Qatar. Of course, not all of this is supported by the government in Doha. Many individuals and charities in Qatar have been known to raise large sums of money for al-Qaeda, the Nusra front, Hamas, and even ISIS. ( https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/CHRG-115hhrg26427 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/C... html). Be use I haven't? Also what about their hard hitting on average of Qatargate and human rights abuses including killings of their LGBTQ dissidents? Qatar is a state sponsor of terrorism and Al Jazeera is a terrorist network.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  Just because someone makes a claim as part of their narrative does not mean the claim itself exclusively belongs to that narrative! If that were the case, none of us should say anything at all.
- Takennickname 3y ago
  Any sources about Qatar being a funder of terrorism? Other than Trump.
  - Jenepas 3y ago
    Glad you asked there's the EU report before most EU think tanks were bought out by Qatar ( Hello Qatargate) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-8-2014-007445_EN.html https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-8-2014-00744... According to official US Committee on Foreign Affairs, has been known to be a permissive environment for terror financing, reportedly funding U.S. designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as Hamas, Al qaeda and ISIS, as well as several extremist groups operating in Syria. At least one high-ranking Qatari official provided support to the mastermind of the 9/11. Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, also made Doha his headquarters for years while the Qatari's--with the Qatari's Government support and even the Muslim Brotherhood has received significant support from Qatar. Of course, not all of this is supported by the government in Doha. Many individuals and charities in Qatar have been known to raise large sums of money for al-Qaeda, the Nusra front, Hamas, and even ISIS.(https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/CHRG-115hhrg26427.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/C...) Let me know when Al Jazeera and Middle East eye cover any of the human rights abuses and funding for Hamas or even the brutal repression of LGBTQ in Qatar. Qatar is a terrorist nation.
Andrex 3y ago
Twitter doesn't exist anymore (as of yesterday[1]), so the Saudis' ownership shares likely transferred to X Corp. How much of X is now owned by Saudi Arabia is the real question. 1. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-no-longer-exists-as-a-company-merges-into-musks-x-corp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-no-longe...
- codeddesign 3y ago
  Large shareholders were moved to equity upon purchase. In other words..the Saudi you are referencing was a large shareholder of the “Old Twitter”. That’s along the lines of “how much did Russia fund Facebook” VTB (sanctioned bank) funded Facebook in the tune of $1bn. It also funded Twitter in 2011 for $191m.
  - BulgarianIdiot 3y ago
    Buying shares is not funding. Unless the shares are emitted from the co itself. Which happens during IPO and dilution only.

by KZerda 3y ago

rjzzleep 3y ago

[flagged]

Teever 3y ago
People did care, and probably tried to tell you, but you probably weren't paying attention.

Jenepas 3y ago

[flagged]

passwordoops 3y ago
Ok, so to amend OP's original point: Should Twitter come with a label as "state-owned" considering both the Qatari and Saudi governments hold a significant stake in the company?
- Jenepas 3y ago
  Personally yes, when i hear everyone clamour for transparency, I want brutal honest transparency, so yes twitter handle and twitter docs should clearly mention that they are owned by Saudia and terrorist Qatar. Same with DW News, Al Jazeera, Middle East eye and Gulf news. I've always wondered, without pure transparency, who will guard the guards?
  - rys 3y ago
    Isn’t DW state-owned by Germany?
  - EntrePrescott 3y ago
    At least DW is totally transparent about it. A quick look at their web site gives you that info immediately. The info page about it even figures as one of the top Questions in their FAQ: "DW is Germany’s international broadcaster. It is organized under public law and funded by the German federal tax budget." https://corporate.dw.com/en/what-kind-of-company-is-deutsche-welle/a-3252998 https://corporate.dw.com/en/what-kind-of-company-is-deutsche... "DW is financed via funding from the state, i.e. from tax revenue. This is in contrast to the domestic public channels, which are funded via broadcasting fees." https://corporate.dw.com/en/who-finances-deutsche-welle/a-36767785 https://corporate.dw.com/en/who-finances-deutsche-welle/a-36...
- v0idzer0 3y ago
  Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. Why is everyone having such a hard to grokking this
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. “A platform” is just an internet term for a kind of publisher (roughly corresponding to “an online publisher who mostly publishes things for which it is – or would be, if it was operating in the US – protected from the liability usually attached to publishers via DMCA section 230.”)
  - passwordoops 3y ago
    A) I never said Twitter should be labelled a state-owned news company, just whether it should be labelled state-owned. B) Twitter (like all "platforms") holds the ability to control the flow of information. The moment a "platform" puts their finger on the scales and blocks certain types of legal information from being discovered (as they did last week in blocking substack links, for example) then they forfeit their claim to being a "platform" and should be treated as media distribution companies. As such they should be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as news organizations should be
jacooper 3y ago
Wait what? Terrorist? Al-jazeera is one of the most renowned news agencies in the world, finally giving an honest voice to the Arab and Islamic world, and they can do this because they don't rely on pleasing advertisers. What do you mean by anti-sentitic?
- Jenepas 3y ago
  Jesus have you seen Al Jazeera covering how Qatar has been known to be a permissive environment for terror financing, reportedly funding U.S. designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as Hamas, Al qaeda and ISIS, as well as several extremist groups operating in Syria. At least one high-ranking Qatari official provided support to the mastermind of the 9/11. Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, also made Doha his headquarters for years while the Qatari's--with the Qatari's Government support and even the Muslim Brotherhood has received significant support from Qatar. Of course, not all of this is supported by the government in Doha. Many individuals and charities in Qatar have been known to raise large sums of money for al-Qaeda, the Nusra front, Hamas, and even ISIS. ( https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/CHRG-115hhrg26427 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/C... html). Be use I haven't? Also what about their hard hitting on average of Qatargate and human rights abuses including killings of their LGBTQ dissidents? Qatar is a state sponsor of terrorism and Al Jazeera is a terrorist network.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
thomastjeffery 3y ago
Just because someone makes a claim as part of their narrative does not mean the claim itself exclusively belongs to that narrative! If that were the case, none of us should say anything at all.
Takennickname 3y ago
Any sources about Qatar being a funder of terrorism? Other than Trump.
- Jenepas 3y ago
  Glad you asked there's the EU report before most EU think tanks were bought out by Qatar ( Hello Qatargate) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-8-2014-007445_EN.html https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-8-2014-00744... According to official US Committee on Foreign Affairs, has been known to be a permissive environment for terror financing, reportedly funding U.S. designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as Hamas, Al qaeda and ISIS, as well as several extremist groups operating in Syria. At least one high-ranking Qatari official provided support to the mastermind of the 9/11. Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, also made Doha his headquarters for years while the Qatari's--with the Qatari's Government support and even the Muslim Brotherhood has received significant support from Qatar. Of course, not all of this is supported by the government in Doha. Many individuals and charities in Qatar have been known to raise large sums of money for al-Qaeda, the Nusra front, Hamas, and even ISIS.(https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/CHRG-115hhrg26427.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg26427/html/C...) Let me know when Al Jazeera and Middle East eye cover any of the human rights abuses and funding for Hamas or even the brutal repression of LGBTQ in Qatar. Qatar is a terrorist nation.

Andrex 3y ago

Twitter doesn't exist anymore (as of yesterday[1]), so the Saudis' ownership shares likely transferred to X Corp. How much of X is now owned by Saudi Arabia is the real question. 1. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-no-longer-exists-as-a-company-merges-into-musks-x-corp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-no-longe...

codeddesign 3y ago
Large shareholders were moved to equity upon purchase. In other words..the Saudi you are referencing was a large shareholder of the “Old Twitter”. That’s along the lines of “how much did Russia fund Facebook” VTB (sanctioned bank) funded Facebook in the tune of $1bn. It also funded Twitter in 2011 for $191m.
- BulgarianIdiot 3y ago
  Buying shares is not funding. Unless the shares are emitted from the co itself. Which happens during IPO and dilution only.