Musk's Ultimatum Email

Elon Musk continues to spread love and joy across his new company. The latest missive is an email asking employees to “click yes” to affirm that they still want to be part of Twitter, which he describes as “hardcore” and requiring “working long hours at high intensity.” Apparently, hundreds of employees refused and opted for three months of severance pay instead.

I see this email as an embarrassment, but I’m guessing that Musk doesn’t care or feels proud of it. He must have known that the message, like all of his, would be made public. How funny to read this in light of all the “quiet quitting” news, although I suspect that that wave has passed since the massive tech layoffs started. Still, no one wants to work for a jerk.

The email is a good example for students to analyze for tone and character. Of course, some students will defend Musk who, for them, can do no wrong.

From: Elon Musk

To: Team [at Twitter]

Subj. A Fork in the Road

Date: Nov. 16, 2022 [time stamp removed]

Going forward, to build a breakthrough Twitter 2.0 and succeed in an increasingly competitive world, we will need to be extremely hardcore. This will mean working long hours at high intensity. Only exceptional performance will constitute a passing grade.

Twitter will also be much more engineering-driven. Design and product management will still be very important and report to me, but those writing great code will constitute the majority of our team and have the greatest sway.

At its heart, Twitter is a software and servers company, so l think this makes sense.

If you are sure that you want to be part of the new Twitter, please click yes on the link below:

[Link removed]

Anyone who has not done so by 5pm ET tomorrow (Thursday) will receive three months of severance.

Whatever decision you make, thank you for your efforts to make Twitter successful.

Elon

Meta's Well-Timed Layoff Message

How clever for Meta to announce 11,000 layoffs as we watch the news for election results. Still, the news ranked highly, with a big headline on the WSJ home page.

Unlike Elon Musk’s curt email to Twitter employees last week, Mark Zuckerberg’s note is longer and posted publicly, which is smart since it would likely hit the press anyway. He follows business communication guidelines by placing the main point up front, and he demonstrates accountability and compassion in the introduction:

I want to take accountability for these decisions and for how we got here. I know this is tough for everyone, and I’m especially sorry to those impacted.

His explanation of what went wrong also demonstrates accountability—and humility: “I got this wrong, and I take responsibility for that.”

Zuckerberg describes severance and other benefits in bullets, and he expresses optimism in the future. Employees will question whether they’re affected, but I’m not sure he can say anything differently in the message because cuts are across the board. Still, people might appreciate a bit more information about how decisions were made.

People must be on edge. Zuckerberg wrote, “Everyone will get an email soon letting you know what this layoff means for you.” How soon? He also offers the chance to “speak with someone to get their questions answered and join information sessions.” The goal seems to be communication by email and mass meetings. In-person meetings are best for delivering bad news, but given remote work and scale, this method is probably the only practical way to go

Twitter Layoff Messages

Perhaps the best example of a bad-news message is a layoff memo (below), and Elon Musk’s Twitter email doesn’t disappoint. Just days after the purchase went through and after a deafening silence, the new CEO sent a short message confirming what employees expected.

The email is classic Musk: direct and decisive, without a lot of compassion. He makes the news extra painful by expressing his distrust: cutting people off from offices and systems and reminding people not to share confidential information (which at least one person did by sharing the internal email).

Layoff messages are typically softer, with more specific reasons for the decision, a rationale for who goes and who stays, more gratitude to those leaving, more information about what people can expect, and more optimism about the future of the company. They are also a chance for leaders to demonstrate their own humility and vulnerability. But that’s not Elon Musk. (That describes Brian Chesky, whose Airbnb layoff message—posted publicly—is still one of my favorites.)

The actual layoffs the next day didn’t go much better. “Confusion” prevailed as 50% were laid off, some losing access in the middle of meetings. Now Musk is left with what he called a “massive drop in revenue” and class-action lawsuits from employees.

---

Team,

In an effort to place Twitter on a healthy path, we will go through the difficult process of reducing our global workforce on Friday. We recognize that this will impact a number of individuals who have made valuable contributions to Twitter, but this action is unfortunately necessary to ensure the company's success moving forward.

Given the nature of our distributed workforce and our desire to inform impacted individuals as quickly as possible, communications for this process will take place via email. By 9AM PST on Friday Nov. 4th, everyone will receive an individual email with the subject line: Your Role at Twitter. Please check your email, including your spam folder.

If your employment is not impacted, you will receive a notification via your Twitter email. 

If your employment is impacted, you will receive a notification with next steps via your personal email.

If you do not receive an email from twitter-hr@ by 5PM PST on Friday Nov. 4th, please email xxxxxxxx.

To help ensure the safety of each employee as well as Twitter systems and customer data, our offices will be temporarily closed and all badge access will be suspended. If you are in an office or on your way to an office, please return home.

We acknowledge this is an incredibly challenging experience to go through, whether or not you are impacted. Thank you for continuing to adhere to Twitter policies that prohibit you from discussing confidential company information on social media, with the press or elsewhere.

We are grateful for your contributions to Twitter and for your patience as we move through this process.

Thank you.

Image source.

CAM Communication Model

At the 2022 ABC Conference, I presented with colleagues about the CAM communication model. Useful for deciding whether, what, and how to communicate, the model walks students through three steps:

• Character Check: What drives me to communicate? To what am I reacting, and what is my purpose? What impact do I want to have? How do I want others to perceive me? How can I demonstrate good character?  

• Audience Analysis: How can I tailor my communication to my audience? What context should I consider? How does communication travel within the organization? What barriers might get in the way?

• Message and Medium: What is the content of my message, and how will I convey that message?

You’re welcome to download and use this handout, which provides generic questions and then a sample activity for students to apply the model when deciding whether to include something potentially controversial or perceived negatively during the job search.

Comms We Regret

Two news stories remind us that what we say may come back to bite us. Two Los Angeles officials resigned from their positions following crass and racist comments by City Council president, Nury Martinez. (Details here, if you have the stomach to read.) Other resignations may follow.

In another situation, Ye (Kanye West) faced Instagram and Twitter restrictions following his anti-Semitic comment. He wrote, “I’m a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I’m going def con 3 on Jewish people. . . ” In response, Adidas is reviewing its sponsorship agreement.

In the LA situation, someone illegally recorded and posted a conversation on Reddit. In the second, West made his own comments public, but he admits being tired. In both cases, the comments were offensive and not a good choice.

Let’s remind students that they are responsible for their communications and may not know how what they say and write will be publicized.

Suggestions for Sending Voice Notes

A Wall Street Journal article, “The Year of the Voice Message,” offers advice that business communication faculty might want to share with students. The voicemail message is out of favor, but voice notes (or voice memos), which brings their own annoyances, are in.

The article describes dislike for voice notes—both sending and receiving them. Still, they persist for convenience and, in some cases, to preserve tone. Some advice is similar to old voicemail messages: keep them short (less than a minute) and beware that others might hear you. Something new: Send a text to introduce the voice note when your receiver needs encouragement to listen.

Other advice is universal for business communication: consider your audience and choose a medium according to your goals. A very short message is best as a text, and a longer message could be an email. Ask yourself, does my voice make a difference in this message? If you’re sending a voice note just for your own convenience, then reconsider: it may be quicker for the receiver to scan a text than to listen.

Image source.

AT&T Missing "You"

AT&T customer communication about Hurricane Ian is missing the customer—particularly “you.” Students could rewrite these bad-news (and persuasive) messages to address customers directly. The “you attitude,” or focus on the audience, would convey more empathy, give residents more confidence in the company, and make reading easier.

AT&T’s Hurricane Ian webpage is odd. The beginning doesn’t have a defined audience, so it’s likely written for anyone who might be interested in the company’s work to restore power. Most sentences start with “we,” “our,” or “FirstNet.” Company leaders also seem proud of their vehicles: four photos in the middle of the page include a link to “download” each.

The next section, with black text on a blue background, is titled, “Supporting Our Customers.” Updates include fees waived and other customer benefits. But students can easily revise paragraphs like this one to make them more audience-focused:

As Hurricane Ian moves through additional states, we are assisting our wireless customers who may be impacted by the storm. To do this, we’re waiving talk, text and data overage charges for AT&T Postpaid & PREPAID customers with billing addresses in zip codes* across areas in Georgia and South Carolina from September 29, 2022 through October 8, 2022.

Should Students Change Their Names for the Job Search?

A new working paper confirms and expands what we know about discrimination in the job search. Applicants with names that are difficult to pronounce are less likely to be called for interviews and may suffer career loss down the road. The researchers describe related studies about racial bias: within minority groups, which already face discrimination, those with less “fluent or familiar-sounding names” are 50% less likely than those with “white” names to get called for an interview.

Students make difficult decisions about whether to change their names or “whiten” their resumes in other ways. In Chapter 13 of Business Communication and Character (11e), we explore the advantages, such as more callbacks for jobs, and the disadvantages. Understandably, students may want to keep their given name, which they feel is an important part of their identity. They also may resist because of moral reasons or because of concerns that, even if they get the job, they might not feel as tough they belong. Chalice Randazzo’s Business and Professional Communication Quarterly article, “A Framework for Résumé Decisions: Comparing Applicants’ and Employers’ Reasons,” offers useful guidance for all resume decisions.

Of course, the real onus is on employers to reduce bias by changing attitudes and hiring practices, for example, with blind hiring. In the meantime, students bear the brunt of a discriminatory system.

Image source.

Uber's Response to Hack

What sounds like a major security breach is getting minimal response from Uber so far. A hacker, possibly 18 years old, apparently posed as a colleague to get IT access through an employee. An embarrassment to the company, the breach could include “full access to the cloud-based systems where Uber stores sensitive customer and financial data.” But Uber communications are trying to minimize the impact.

Three days after the breach, the only message I can find is a “Security Update,” copied below, on Uber’s Newsroom page. Company leaders are likely scrambling to lock down and protect information, but more communication is important. Criticism is harsh because of how easily the hacker appears to have duped an employee through social engineering and because of the unfortunate timing: Uber’s former chief security officer is currently on trial for paying hackers $100,000 to avoid disclosing a breach back in 2016.

The communication and situation are challenging, but people are watching and waiting, as we see in these tweets. This situation raises issues of several character dimensions, for example, accountability, humility, integrity, and courage. With more transparency, the company might be less vulnerable now, not more, as the leaders might fear.

---

September 16, 10:30am PT

While our investigation and response efforts are ongoing, here is a further update on yesterday’s incident:

• We have no evidence that the incident involved access to sensitive user data (like trip history).

• All of our services including Uber, Uber Eats, Uber Freight, and the Uber Driver app are operational.

• As we shared yesterday, we have notified law enforcement.

• Internal software tools that we took down as a precaution yesterday are coming back online this morning.

September 15, 6:25pm PT

We are currently responding to a cybersecurity incident. We are in touch with law enforcement and will post additional updates here as they become available.

U.S. DOT Airline Dashboard

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) created what it calls a “dashboard” for passengers to know what to expect when their flight is delayed or cancelled. This work results from ongoing debate about airlines’ responsibility, particularly given the many issues travelers have experienced since the pandemic. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has pushed the airlines to offer at least free meals for 3-hour or longer delays and free hotel stays when passengers need to wait at an airport.

Although some airlines say they already offered these accommodations, DOT Deputy Secretary Polly Trottenberg said this is about enforcement: “Now that it’s in the customer service plans, it’s not something in discretion. It’s something we can enforce. And I think this dashboard is really going to kind of raise the state-of-the-art for consumers.”

As a visual, the dashboard works well. Looking across the rows, we see clearly what to expect from each of the airlines. Categorizing the actions by cancellations (shown here) and delays makes sense from the passenger’s perspective. However, the graphic is skewed right on the page because of the left-side column.

In addition, when I hear “dashboard,” I think of a more complex, interactive spreadsheet. The only functionality seems kind-of silly. The dropdown menu at top doesn’t add value because we can just as easily scan across to see what any airline provides. Also, I’m not sure why anyone would want the ability to “keep only” or “exclude” specific items—or to see repetitive text when they mouseover the markings. Finally, I chose “view data” and got the following in a pop-up window, which communicates nothing relevant.

I would call the visual a table, matrix, or grid. But I don’t want to disregard the good news: airlines are communicating what customers can expect, can be held accountable and, in some cases, are providing better service.

New Text Management Tools

Finally, we’ll soon be able to mark iPhone text messages as unread in addition to pinning them to the top of the heap. Android users can mark texts as important and organize them into categories based on sender and type.

These features recognize that texts are pervasive and useful—and becoming as overwhelming as email. Businesses do provide timely, relevant information, and people are more likely to open texts than emails, often within 15 minutes, so the appeal is clear.

My concern is whether texts are replacing email as a more efficient way of communicating—or whether they are simply piling on, causing us to spend more screen time.

UPDATE: A Wall Street Journal writer suggests additional tools and, as I suggest, ways to set limits.

Google Employee Petition

Google employees are petitioning for the company to stop collecting abortion-related data. The concern comes after Roe v. Wade was overturned, which could put women who search for abortion services in jeopardy.

Launched in January 2021, Alphabet Workers' Union is driving the petition, now signed by more than 650 employees. The group is asking Google to refrain from turning data about searches and illegal abortions over to authorities, as Facebook did; to omit “misleading ‘pregnancy crisis centers’” in search results, including maps, which often lead to anti-abortion centers; to stop donations and lobbying entirely; and more.

As tech employee activism becomes more prevalent, employees feel more empowered to demonstrate courage. I don’t see the entire petition, but I wonder whether employees are asking for too much, particularly an end to all lobbying and political donations. A more focused, realistic request of actions that show the company’s leadership among tech companies could be more effective.

Although the petition was sent to CEO Sundar Pichai and other executives on Monday, the group hadn’t received a response by Thursday. Company leaders are called on to demonstrate integrity—transparency in communication and consistency with company principles. This is also an opportunity to lead with humility and to show a willingness to be vulnerable because this is a highly sensitive issue with no clear answers. Although a difficult situation to address, leaders must respond, particularly before the story becomes about the lack of response.

Robinhood Layoff Message

Robinhood attracted retail investors during the pandemic but is facing losses as users leave the platform. In Business Communication and Character, I criticized Robinhood’s aggressive marketing tactics to lure inexperienced investors. Now, the company is doing its second round of layoffs: 9% of staff in April and another 23% in August. Lucky for us, the message to staff is posted on the Robinhood blog—a smart move because notes like are typically leaked, anyway.

Overall, CEO Vlad Tenev’s message meets criteria for bad-news communications. The main point is upfront, as I suggest for layoff messages because employees should know the news already. According to this message, they do: Tenev refers to All-Hands meetings before and after the written message. We get the sense that internal communication has been ongoing and that decisions have been transparent.

The message tells employees what’s next and that they will hear the news quickly: “Everyone will receive an email and a Slack message with your status—with resources and support if you are leaving. We’re sending everyone a message immediately after this meeting so you don’t have to wait for clarity.” The better approach would be individual, in-person (or Zoom) meetings, but this isn’t always practical.

Tenev described part of the reasons for the reductions but omitted a recent $30 million fine and increased regulatory pressure. Yet he demonstrated accountability and humility by admitting bad decisions. He wrote, “As CEO, I approved and took responsibility for our ambitious staffing trajectory—this is on me.” In addition, on a press call, Tenev admitted, “The reality is that we over-hired, in particular in some of our support functions.”

Tenev also demonstrated compassion. He sounds human, saying goodbye to people who will leave and encouraging people who will stay, without being too positive, which could be off-putting.

In sum, this isn’t the best layoff message example we have, but it’s certainly not the worst. I would share this with students as a positive example.

New Uber Document Leaks

Internal Uber documents from 2013 - 2017 prove what many have thought about the company under the leadership of founder and former CEO Travis Kalanick. More than 124,000 illustrate how Uber, according to a Guardian article, “louted laws, duped police, exploited violence against drivers and secretly lobbied governments during its aggressive global expansion.” Company executives admitted to acting like “pirates.” One wrote, “We’re just f—ing illegal.”

In Building Leadership Character, I profiled Kalanick’s leadership as a example of failing humility. As a dimension of character, humility is being “rightsized”—believing you’re neither below nor above others. Bragging about skirting the law is an obvious illustration of a lack of humility.

A spokesperson for Kalanick responded to what is called the “Uber files.” The message itself demonstrates failing humility, including an inability to learn from mistakes. (Of course Kalanick may face legal in addition to image challenges.) Instead of taking responsibility, the spokesperson questions the authenticity of the documents and tries to distance Kalanick from them:

In pressing its false agenda that Mr Kalanick directed illegal or improper conduct, the ICIJ [International Consortium of Investigative Journalists] claims to have documents that Mr Kalanick was on or even authored, some of which are almost a decade old.

As a crisis communication strategy, distancing is often effective. Uber employs the same strategy in its statement, for example, “When we say Uber is a different company today, we mean it literally: 90 percent of current Uber employees joined after Dara became CEO.” The company admits mistakes and uses that fact as the impetus for change: “It’s also exactly why Uber hired a new CEO, Dara Khosrowshahi, who was tasked with transforming every aspect of how Uber operates.”

Business communication students can analyze both responses as crisis and persuasive communications. Which is more effective in restoring image?

Image source.

Boris Johnson's Resignation Speech

British PM Boris Johnson’s resignation speech is a lesson in delivery skills. Johnson reads a script and yet sounds natural—he uses conversational language and comes across as authentic.

Johnson resisted calls for his resignation, both at this point and previously, when lawmakers believed other transgressions were cause for him to leave office, for example, holding parties that violated Covid guidelines. The “final straw" was when Johnson hired someone who faced sexual misconduct charges. Although Johnson denied knowing about the claims, he later admitted that he did know. Two high-ranking officials resigned, followed by several others.

The speech, 6.5 minutes long, begins with his decision and the “will of the Parliamentary Conservative Party” that a new leader should be instated. He then highlights successes during his tenure, including Brexit, Covid actions, and supporting the Ukrainian people during the war. Expressing regret, he concedes that “no one is indispensable.” At the same time, he acknowledges that some people will be “relieved” and, with colloquial language says, “Them’s the breaks.”

Ending with gratitude for the job, lawmakers, and the public, Johnson leaves on a positive note about the future of the United Kingdom. Despite issues of integrity throughout his time as PM, Johnson does the right, if not obvious, thing in the end.

TikTok Tries to Reassure Senators

Two letters illustrate persuasive communication for students to analyze. The first is a letter from nine republican U.S. senators following a BuzzFeed article, “Leaked Audio From 80 Internal TikTok Meetings Shows That US User Data Has Been Repeatedly Accessed From China.”

The second is TikTok’s response. After a few introductory paragraphs (which say very little, in my opinion), CEO Shou Zi Chew tackles each question in sequence.

As we might expect, some responses are clearer than others. In a fairly obvious obfuscation, Chew doesn’t respond to sub-questions (a, b, c, etc.) individually. Question 9, about Beijing parent company ByteDance and a newly named subsidiary, is particularly confusing.

Despite company efforts, at least one senator believes TikTok should testify before Congress.

Image source.

More Documents Show McKinsey's Role in Promoting Drugs

McKinsey has already paid close to a $600 million settlement for its consulting work with Purdue Pharma that fueled the opioid crisis. Now, as part of that investigation, new evidence has emerged about its role with other companies.

For example, McKinsey worked with Endo, which ramped up sales as part of a “blitz” recommended by McKinsey. In some cases, McKinsey suggested focusing on more potent products and, as we saw with Purdue, targeting physicians and developing aggressive sales incentive programs.

Endo sold Opana, which became an injected street-drug and caused an HIV outbreak. Still, McKinsey suggested ways to increase sales. McKinsey also recommended ways to avoid taxes, which, although technically legal, President Obama called tax “abuse.”

McKinsey promoted itself as having “in-depth experience in narcotics.” In one document, McKinsey boasted, “We serve the majority of the leading players.” That persuasive language has come back to bite the company.

Examples from the McKinsey document trove are included in 11th edition of Business Communication and Character to illustrate persuasive communication, writing style, and a lack of integrity. Newly released documents illustrate internal debate; for example, one consultant wrote, “We may not have done anything wrong, but did we ask ourselves what the negative consequences of the work we were doing was, and how it could be minimized?”

McKinsey may have hoped that the large settlement and public email to staff at the time would have ended the company’s trouble. But more criticism and lawsuits may be looming.

Companies Navigate Comms After Roe v. Wade

After the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, women’s constitutional right to have an abortion, companies are faced with thorny decisions about whether and how to communicate. Leaders have become more vocal on social issues, for example, gay marriage and Black Lives Matter, but this situation may be more complicated.

Several companies have expanded their health care coverage to include travel for medical procedures, but they avoid the word “abortion.” For example, Disney sent an email to staff:

“We have processes in place so that an employee who may be unable to access care in one location has affordable coverage for receiving similar levels of care in another location,” including, “family planning (including pregnancy-related decisions).”

Other companies were more direct. Back in April, after the Texas ruling that limited abortions, Yelp’s chief diversity officer said, “We want to be able to recruit and retain employees wherever they might be living,” She raised the issue of equity—access for employees who may not have the funds to travel. She also said, “The ability to control your reproductive health, and whether or when you want to extend your family, is absolutely fundamental to being able to be successful in the workplace,”

Starbucks, facing unionization efforts and staffing issues, sent three letters to partners during the past few months and posted them publicly. Each uses the word “abortion” and acknowledges different views on the subject and that some may feel “disheartened or in shock.”

How companies approach these communications reflects their business, employee base, location, and culture. We might expect Starbucks, whose founder and current interim CEO Howard Schultz has consistently been vocal on controversial issues. Starbucks leaders demonstrated courage, vulnerability, compassion, and integrity—standing up for what they believe is right, despite strong feelings on the other side.

Business Communication and Character Lessons from Jan. 6 Hearings

Not every faculty member will want to talk about the United States House Select Committee hearings about the January 6, 2021, attack on the capitol. At the time, some public school teachers were instructed not to “wade into” the events. But for faculty who are willing to take a degree of risk, the hearings serve as excellent illustrations of business communication principles and leadership character dimensions. Following are a few examples.

BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

Media Choice: The committee chooses different media for different purposes. Students can evaluate why they might have chosen text, interviews, scripts, live or recorded witness testimony, video, etc. and how effective each is for the purpose.

Delivery Style: Committee representatives and witnesses demonstrate a variety of delivery styles. Some are more natural/conversational or scripted than others. What is the impact of William Barr’s use of a profanity (“b—s—”)?

Claims and Evidence: The committee uses a variety of evidence to prove their claims about former President Trump’s role in trying to overturn the election. For example, the fourth hearing describes voting data in Georgia and Arizona. Students could evaluate, for any of the seven claims, which evidence was strongest and weakest. We also see examples of balancing emotional appeal (for example, Ruby Freeman’s and Shaye Moss’s testimony in the fourth hearing), logical arguments (for example, the testimony in the second hearing about laws and constitutional restrictions on former Vice President Pence’s ability to refuse to certify votes), and credibility (for example, the committee shows a link for viewers to see witness bios online). See a summary of evidence here.

Organization: The committee is trying to prove that former President Trump had a seven-part plan (listed below) to overturn the election. The points are written using message titles (or talking headings) and serve as the committee’s claims. At the beginning of each hearing, committee leaders preview the claim and evidence.

Q&A: Although some of the questions are clearly scripted, students can analyze types of questions asked and how witnesses respond. They may find notable differences between recorded and live testimony.

Email Privacy: Once again, we learn the lesson that emails, text messages, and voicemails may be made public during legal investigations; any communication is discoverable.

CHARACTER

Vulnerability: Several witnesses demonstrate vulnerability; they risk emotional exposure in addition to the targeting and harassment they already experienced.

Humility: We see former President Trump’s lack of humility in his unwillingness to accept failure or defeat.

Compassion: Committee members are compassionate when interacting with witnesses, although we see minimal emotion.

Integrity: The committee contrasts integrity of witnesses with that of former President Trump.

Courage: By participating on the committee, Republican members risk backlash from colleagues and constituents; witnesses demonstrate courage by contradicting former President Trump’s claims and, in some cases, his demands.

Accountability: Witnesses stand by their decisions, for example, in refusing to overturn election results.

Authenticity: Some witnesses and committee members come across as more “genuine” than others.

---

Here are the committee’s main claims:

Trump attempted to convince Americans that significant levels of fraud had stolen the election from him despite knowing that he had, in fact, lost the 2020 election:

1. Trump had knowledge that he lost the 2020 election, but spread misinformation to the American public and made false statements claiming significant voter fraud led to his defeat;

2. Trump planned to remove and replace the Attorney General and Justice Department officials in an effort to force the DOJ to support false allegations of election fraud;

3. Trump pressured Vice President Pence to refuse certified electoral votes in the official count on January 6th, in violation of the U.S. Constitution;

4. Trump pressured state lawmakers and election officials to alter election results in his favor;

5. Trump’s legal team and associates directed Republicans in seven states to produce and send fake "alternate" electoral slates to Congress and the National Archives;

6. Trump summoned and assembled a destructive mob in Washington and sent them to march on the U.S. Capitol; and

7. Trump ignored multiple requests to speak out in real-time against the mob violence, refused to instruct his supporters to disband and failed to take any immediate actions to halt attacks on the Capitol.

Musk's Meeting with Twitter Employees

A summary of Elon Musk’s meeting with Twitter staff gives us a window into a typical “all-hands meeting.” Employees who ask questions demonstrate courage—and humility.

Of course, in this case, employees are most concerned about their jobs if/when Musk’s acquisition of the company is final. A Wall Street Journal article describes his stance:

Regarding layoffs, Mr. Musk said anyone who is a significant contributor shouldn’t have anything to worry about, according to people who viewed the meeting. “Right now, costs exceed revenue,” he said, according to the people. “That’s not a great situation.”

Likewise, this isn’t a great response for worried staff. How do they know whether they are “a significant contributor”? Doesn’t everyone believe that they are? As one person tweeted, “still not sure if I need to start packing my bags.” The company might lose good people in the meantime—people who don’t want to stick around to see what happens.

As expected, Musk was asked how he views freedom of speech. Musk distinguished between freedom of speech and “freedom of reach,” giving the example of “walk[ing] into the middle of Times Square and deny[ing] the Holocaust" but not allowing that to be promoted. "So I think people should be allowed to say pretty outrageous things that are within the bounds of the law, but then that doesn’t get amplified. It doesn’t get, you know, a ton of reach."

A lot of uncertainty remains for Twitter employees. It’s difficult to know how sincere the meeting was. As this employee cartoon suggests, employees expected that the meeting, although billed as confidential, would be leaked. Still, the format was probably useful for employees to hear directly from Musk, which is the point of these meetings, whether in person or virtual.