Badenoch (right) will give a welcome address at the conference, with her party under increasing pressure from Farage (left) and Reform UK. Composite: PA
Event co-founded by Jordan Peterson will bring together global rightwing figures including senior US Republicans
Influential rightwingers from around the world are to gather in London from Monday at a major conference to network and build connections with senior US Republicans linked to the Trump administration.
The UK opposition leader, the Conservatives’ Kemi Badenoch, and Nigel Farage of the Reform UK party, her hard-right anti-immigration rival, will compete to present themselves as the torchbearer of British conservatism.
Conservatives from Britain, continental Europe and Australia attending the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference will seize on the opportunity to meet and hear counterparts from the US, including those with links to the new Trump administration. The House speaker, the Republican Mike Johnson, had been due to attend in person but will now give a keynote address remotely on Monday.
Other Republicans due to speak include the US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Vivek Ramaswamy – who has worked with Elon Musk on moves to radically reshape the US government – and Kevin Roberts, the president of the US Heritage Foundation, the thinktank behind the controversial “Project 2025” blueprint for Trump’s second term.
The conference, which is intended to be a gathering of influential intellectuals shaping global rightwing thinking, has a distinctly anti-environmental and socially conservative theme. It pledges to build on “our growing movement and continue the vital work of relaying the foundations of our civilisation”.
Hate speech on X was consistently 50% higher for at least eight months after tech billionaire Elon Musk bought the social media platform, new research has found.
The research looked at the prevalence of overt hate speech including a wide range of racist, homophobic and transphobic slurs.
The study, published today in PLOS ONE, was conducted by a team of researchers led by Daniel Hickney from the University of California, Berkeley.
On October 27 2022, Musk officially purchased X (then known as Twitter) for US$44 billion and became its CEO. His takeover was accompanied by promises to reduce hate speech on the platform and tackle bots and other inauthentic accounts.
But after he bought X, Musk made several changes to the platform to reduce content moderation. For example, in November 2022 he fired much of the company’s full time workforce. He also fired outsourced content moderators who tracked abuse on X, despite research showing social medial platforms with high levels of content moderation contain less hate speech.
This new study is the first to show that this wasn’t an anomaly.
Hate speech including homophobic, racist and transphobic slurs was significantly higher on X after Elon Musk bought the platform. The black lines represent standard errors. Hickey et al., 2025 / PLOS One
More than 4 million posts
The study examined 4.7 million English language posts on X from the beginning of 2022 through to June 9 2023. This period includes the ten months before Musk bought X and the eight months afterwards.
The study measured overt hate speech, the meaning of which was clear to anyone who saw it – speech attacking identity groups or using toxic language. It did not measure covert types of hate speech, such as coded language used by some extremist groups to spread hate but plausibly deny doing so.
As well as measuring the amount of hate speech on X, the study also measured how much other users engaged with this material by liking it.
The researchers’ access to X data was cut off during the study due to a policy change by the platform, replacing free access to approved academic researchers with payment options which are generally unaffordable. This significantly hampered their ability to collect sample posts. But they don’t mention whether it affected their results.
A clear increase in hate
The study found “a clear increase” in the average number of posts containing hate speech following Musk’s purchase of X. Specifically, the volume of posts containing hate speech was “consistently” 50% higher after Musk took over X compared to beforehand – a jump from an estimated average of 2,179 to 3,246 posts containing hate speech per week.
Transphobic slurs saw the highest increase, rising from an average of roughly 115 posts per week before Musk’s acquisition to an average of 418 afterwards.
The level of user engagement with posts containing hate speech also increased under Musk’s watch. For example, the weekly rate at which hate speech content was liked by users jumped by 70%.
The researchers say these results suggest either hate speech wasn’t taken down, hateful users became more active, the platform’s algorithm unintentionally promoted hate speech to users who like such content – or a combination of these possibilities.
The study also detected no decrease in the activity of inauthentic accounts on X. In fact, it found a “potential increase” in the number of bot accounts partly based on a large upswing in posts promoting cryptocurrency, which are typically associated with bots.
An important data-driving deep dive
There were a number of limitations to the study. For example, it only measured hate speech posts in English, which accounts for only 31% of posts on the platform.
Even so, the study is an important, data-driven deep dive into the state of X. It shows it is a platform where hate speech is prolific. It also shows Musk has failed to fulfil his earlier promises to address problems on X such as hate speech and bot activity.
As Musk himself said at the White House earlier this week: “Some of the things I say will be incorrect and should be corrected”.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Power-mad orange gasbag Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One after signing a proclamation renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America on February 9, 2025. (Photo: Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images)
“It’s at times like these that journalists need to put down their pens and advocate for accountable leadership,” asserted one campaigner.
First Amendment defenders are calling on media organizations and journalists to stand up to bullying and intimidation by U.S. President Donald Trump, whose administration on Friday confirmed the indefinite exclusion of one of the world’s largest news agencies from White House press briefings and Air Force One flights over its refusal to adopt the Republican leader’s new name for the Gulf of Mexico.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich said that because The Associated Press “continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change” of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, it will be indefinitely banned from White House news conferences and the president’s official airplane.
“The level of pettiness displayed by the White House is so incredible that it almost hides the gravity of the situation.”
The New York-based AP, which provides news content to roughly 15,000 media outlets in over 100 countries, has explained that, because the gulf is an international body of water, it will continue to call it the Gulf of Mexico because Mexico—whose president on Thursday threatened to sue Google for adopting Trump’s name change—and other countries do not recognize the new name.
In contrast, the AP said it will call Denali, the highest peak in North America, Mt. McKinley following a name change by Trump because the Alaska mountain is located entirely inside the United States.
Budowich said the AP‘s decision on the Gulf of Mexico exposes the agency’s “commitment to misinformation.”
“While their right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting is protected by the First Amendment, it does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces,” he argued.
But critics said the Trump administration’s behavior is about a lot more than just a spat over a name change.
“Of course, this is just more petty behavior by a president seeking to punish any news organization that doesn’t follow his dictates, regardless of how ridiculous they may be,” Timothy Karr, the senior director of strategy and communications at Free Press, told Common Dreams on Friday.
“It’s at times like these that journalists need to put down their pens and advocate for accountable leadership,” Karr stressed. “They need to advocate for themselves, their colleagues, and for journalism writ large.”
“The good news is that more than a dozen of the mass market news outlets have refused to adopt Trump’s name change for the Gulf of Mexico,” he added. “That’s a start. They now need to speak out against his First Amendment threats, despite the consequences. There is much more at stake now than just having access to the White House.”
“By defying Trump, the AP has created a rallying point for other organizations and individuals to find their spines and defy him as well.”
Writing for Public Notice Friday, Noah Berlatsky commended the AP for “not changing their style to suit the whims of a would-be tin-pot dictator.”
“And by defying Trump, the AP has created a rallying point for other organizations and individuals to find their spines and defy him as well,” Berlatsky added.
“The White House cannot dictate how news organizations report the news, nor should it penalize working journalists because it is unhappy with their editors’ decisions,” WHCA president Eugene Daniels said earlier this week.
RSF USA executive director Clayton Weimers said in a statement that “the level of pettiness displayed by the White House is so incredible that it almost hides the gravity of the situation.”
“A sitting president is punishing a major news outlet for its constitutionally protected choice of words,” Weimers added. “Donald Trump has been trampling over press freedom since his first day in office.”
President Trump banning the Associated Press from an event over their usage of "Gulf of Mexico" instead of "Gulf of America" may seem more absurd than alarming, but Trump's attacks on the free press are no joke.
Numerous experts highlighted what they called the unconstitutionality of banning a media outlet from press briefings for political reasons.
“The AP—a major news agency that produces and distributes reports to thousands of newspapers, radio stations, and TV broadcasters around the world—has had long-standing access to the White House,” Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, wrote on Friday.
“It is now losing that access because its exercise of editorial discretion doesn’t align with the administration’s preferred messaging,” Terr added. “That’s viewpoint discrimination, and it’s unconstitutional.”
Berlatsky wrote: “As ABC, Meta, the LA Times, The Washington Post, and Google demonstrate, you lose 100% of the fights you preemptively and despicably surrender. The AP has already won an important victory by refusing to change the Gulf of Mexico to some random other name at the whim of a power-mad orange gasbag.”
“If any portion of Trump’s agenda is to be stopped, we need people and organizations who are willing to defy him and speak truths he doesn’t want to hear,” he added. “Despite Trump, the AP still calls the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of Mexico. In doing so, it’s reminding us what freedom looks like. It’s also demonstrating us that if you don’t want to lose your freedoms, you have to use them.”
Power-mad orange gasbag Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Adam Johnson (Column, 2/3/25): “The New York Times, Washington Post and CNN ran with the framing that ‘DOGE’ was some good-faith, post-ideological effort to ‘cut costs,’ ‘find savings’ and ‘increase efficiencies.’”
Having spent nearly $300 million to purchase the US presidency for Donald Trump, Elon Musk now feels entitled to do with it as he pleases. Just how radically Musk plans to remake the country was conveyed to the American people only after the election, when Musk stood behind the presidential seal on Inauguration Day and gave a Nazi salute. Then did it again. Maybe that sort of thing was OK to do in apartheid South Africa, where Musk grew up, but it’s jarring to see here in the United States.
Reporters initially struggled to meet the moment (FAIR.org, 2/4/25), downplaying Musk’s salute (the Washington Post described a “high-energy speech“), as well as his broader agenda, which Musk now openly declares a “revolution,” and consists of an unelected billionaire wresting control of nearly the entire executive branch of government. Early media reports went along with Musk’s “efficiency” mantra (Column, 2/3/25), but more recently reporters have started to find their footing, and the dangers of Musk’s project are being conveyed. Sort of.
“Reporters on the battlefield are doing what they can” to expose the radical nature of Trump’s second term, writes media columnist Oliver Darcy (Status, 2/5/25). “The news generals back in the command center, however, are largely abdicating their duties.”
‘Musk’s audacious goal’
Nowhere is this discrepancy more apparent than at the Washington Post, a newspaper famed for opposing a prior Republican president with an expansive view of executive power. These days, however, even as Post reporters like Jeff Stein are busy breaking stories (e.g., 1/28/25, 2/8/25) about the Trump power grab, the paper’s higher-ups are careful not to offend the president or Musk. The Post is even, incredibly, calling on the Constitution-defying billionaire duo to push further.
As Elon Musk seizes extraconstitutional control of the federal budget, Washington Post editors (2/7/25) urge him to use that power to go after Social Security and Medicare.
“To have any chance of achieving Musk’s audacious goal of $2 trillion in cuts,” the Post editorial board (2/7/25) wrote, “Trump will need to work with elected representatives in Congress to reform entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare before they become insolvent.”
While claiming it wants Trump to “erect guardrails” for Musk, the Post urges the president to abandon one of the only guardrails he established—the cutting of Social Security and Medicare, which Trump repeatedly said he wouldn’t do, but recently started waffling on.
To be clear, the Post has long called for cutting so-called entitlements (FAIR.org, 11/1/11, 6/15/23). But to do so at this moment—by encouraging a coup attempt to push further—is quite extraordinary.
The Post’s move comes as its billionaire owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, is lavishing praise and millions of dollars on Trump and his family, while coaching his paper to take a less critical approach in its coverage (FAIR.org, 1/22/25). Bezos’s ingratiation toward Trump started prior to the election, when Bezos personally spiked the Post’s endorsement of Kamala Harris (FAIR.org, 10/30/24).
Good news for X from Amazon
The Washington Post (2/4/25) reports on “divergent views among Jewish leaders in how to respond to Musk”: Some object to his ” Nazi-esque salute and Holocaust jokes,” others appreciate his censorship of criticism of Israel.
Bezos has also been busy making nice with Musk, his longtime rival for most powerful man on Earth and in space. On both fronts, Musk now has a decided edge, aided by his control over much of the US government, which both men’s sprawling empires rely on for billions of dollars in contracts.
With Musk’s hand on the public-money spigot, Bezos apparently did him a favor. After Musk openly heiled Hitler, Jewish leaders renewed calls to boycott Musk’s social media platform, X (Washington Post, 2/4/25). “To advertisers—including Google, Amazon and the ADL: Pull your ads now,” the Jewish leaders wrote. “The pressure is working. X’s financial difficulties prove it.”
But the boycott’s pressure was countered by Bezos’s company. “[X] got good news last week, with Amazon reportedly planning to hike its advertising on the site,” the Post (2/4/25) reported, without mentioning Bezos.
While X’s finances “were once so bad that Musk floated the idea of filing for bankruptcy,” things are suddenly looking up, the Financial Times (2/12/25) reported:
Musk famously admitted to overpaying for Twitter after he bought the social media platform known now as X for $44 billion in 2022. But the billionaire’s foray into government has coincided with a turnaround in X’s fortunes, as advertisers, including Amazon, flock back to the platform.
‘Lemmings leaping in unison’
Kathleen Parker (Washington Post, 1/24/25) likened those who condemned Musk’s Nazi gesture to “lemmings leaping in unison from a cliff”—because it’s suicidal to notice fascism in high places?
It wasn’t just Bezos’s company that threw Musk a lifeline, but also his newspaper. An initial Post headline (1/20/25), which omitted mention of Musk’s Nazi salute, read “Elon Musk Gives Exuberant Speech at Inauguration.” The following day, Post columnist Megan McArdle, echoing the ADL, downgraded Musk’s salute to an “awkward gesture,” the same phrase Post columnist Kathleen Parker used to dismiss those who saw something more sinister as “lemmings leaping in unison from a cliff” (Washington Post, 1/24/25).
Interestingly, one of the most vociferous “lemmings” was Post columnist Catherine Rampell, who brilliantly called out Musk’s Nazi salute, but on CNN, and noticeably not in the Post, except once in passing (1/30/25).
Musk responded to Rampell’s CNN appearance by threatening to sue her in a post (1/27/25) to his over 200 million X followers.
I noted at the top that Musk spent nearly $300 million to elect Trump, but that’s only part of the story. Musk also provided inestimable support by transforming X into a pro-Trump bullhorn. Personally, when I logged onto X during the campaign, I routinely saw Musk’s pro-Trump tweets at the top of my feed, even though I didn’t follow Musk at the time.
Since the election, Musk ’s gifts to Trump have continued. X recently agreed to pay Trump $10 million to settle Trump’s 2021 lawsuit against the company, even though the case was dismissed in 2022. Trump was still appealing the ruling two-and-a-half years later when a deal was cut. “The settlement talks with X began after the election and were more informal, with both Trump and Musk personally involved in hammering out the $10 million number,” the Wall Street Journal (2/13/25) reported.
‘Cheering for change’
New York Times (2/11/25): Many of the federal agencies targeted by Musk “were leading investigations, enforcement matters or lawsuits pending against Mr. Musk’s companies.”
It’s quite something for Elon Musk—the world’s richest human and one of the largest government contractors—to gleefully slash public spending benefiting others. Especially when, by one measure, “virtually all of his net worth can be pinned to government help,” CNN (11/20/24) reported.
While Musk claims to wield a populist’s pitchfork as he attacks “the bureaucracy,” a closer look reveals the work of an oligarch’s scalpel. Musk’s coup team—called DOGE, and consisting mostly of twentysomething male engineers, several of whom appear to share Musk’s racist ideology (New York Times, 2/7/25)—is targeting the federal agencies investigating Musk’s companies, which in addition to X, include Tesla and SpaceX.
“President Trump has been in office less than a month, and Elon Musk’s vast business empire is already benefiting—or is now in a decidedly better position to benefit,” read the opening lines of a New York Times story (2/11/25):
At least 11 federal agencies that have been affected by [Trump’s] moves have more than 32 continuing investigations, pending complaints or enforcement actions into Mr. Musk’s six companies.
While Trump claims Musk is “not gaining anything” from the arrangement, and Musk says the same, Wall Street sees things differently. Even as Musk says he’s turning his “efficiency” revolution to the Pentagon—the only federal agency never to pass an audit, and where any honest attempt to rein in government spending would begin—stocks for armsmaking companies associated with Musk are surging, while those without ties to him languish. “Palantir, as well as Musk’s SpaceX, OpenAI and robotics and AI specialist Anduril Industries, are cheering for change,” the Wall Street Journal (2/10/25) reported.
In other words, having seized control of the levers of government, an oligarch will now be directing funding to himself and his cronies. That’s Wall Street’s view, anyhow.
It seems to be Bezos’s as well. With Amazon and Blue Origin, Bezos’s space company, competing for billions in government contracts, it makes perfect business sense for Bezos to cozy up to Musk and Trump. From a journalistic perspective, however, it’s nothing short of a disaster, one that’s playing out daily in the pages of the WashingtonPost.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Members of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) protest against firings during a rally to defend federal workers in Washington, D.C. on February 11, 2025. (Photo: Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)
The “mass firing spree,” said one union leader, is “about gutting the federal government, silencing workers, and forcing agencies into submission to a radical agenda that prioritizes cronyism over competence.”
The Trump administration intensified its large-scale purge of the federal government on Thursday by moving to fire potentially hundreds of thousands of probationary employees, an effort that one leading union condemned as a power grab aimed at forcing agencies to capitulate to the whims of a lawless president.
The new flurry of terminations impacted workers across at least seven federal agencies, from the Department of Veterans Affairs—which said it fired 1,000 employees—to the Forest Service, Department of Education, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees—a union that represents more than 750,000 federal workers—said no one should fall for the Trump administration’s claim that the mass firings are about federal employees’ performance or enhancing government “efficiency.”
“This administration has abused the probationary period to conduct a politically driven mass firing spree, targeting employees not because of performance, but because they were hired before Trump took office,” Kelley said in a statement Thursday. “These firings are not about poor performance—there is no evidence these employees were anything but dedicated public servants. They are about power. They are about gutting the federal government, silencing workers, and forcing agencies into submission to a radical agenda that prioritizes cronyism over competence.”
Vowing to “fight these firings every step of the way,” Kelley said terminated employees were “given no notice, no due process, and no opportunity to defend themselves in a blatant violation of the principles of fairness and merit that are supposed to govern federal employment.”
“We will stand with every impacted employee, pursue every legal challenge available, and hold this administration accountable for its reckless actions,” said Kelley. “Federal employees are not disposable, and we will not allow the government to treat them as such.”
“None of this is about saving money, it is about Musk and Trump enriching themselves and their wealthy friends while making huge cuts to services Americans depend on.”
The new purge targeting more recently hired government employees marks the latest salvo in the Trump administration’s far-reaching assault on federal agencies, an effort spearheaded by unelected billionaire Elon Musk and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. President Donald Trump has given the advisory commission unprecedented authority over federal hiring, effectively installing Musk as the leader of a shadow government in Washington, D.C.
The Washington Post noted that “the latest data shows there were more than 220,000 federal employees within their one-year probationary period as of last March.”
“These workers typically have little protection from being fired without cause,” the Post observed.
The new administration’s sweeping attacks on the federal workforce, which have drawn union-led legal challenges, have left career civil servants confused, demoralized, and fearful of the future—music to the ears of far-right officials like Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, who has expressed his desire to leave government employees “traumatically affected.”
An anonymous OPM employee wrote for Slate last week that agency workers “are just as frustrated, confused, and traumatized as the rest of America.”
“When I started my job at OPM, I swore an oath to the Constitution, and to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic, making it especially awful that the threat to our government is coming from inside my own office building,” the worker wrote. “The villains here aren’t the civil servants working to serve the American people.”
A purge of the federal workforce and wholesale dismantling of government departments were central goals of the far-right Project 2025 agenda authored by Vought and others in Trump’s orbit. The playbook called on the new administration to disempower career civil servants and “fill its ranks with political appointees.”
In addition to leading OMB, Vought is serving as acting director of the CFPB, an agency hit particularly hard by Thursday’s purge. Reuters reported that “a new category of employees” at the consumer agency “received termination notices on Thursday… in a sign that the Trump administration was going beyond probationary employees as it looks to fire federal staff.”
“Notices to dozens of so-called ‘term employees,’ full-time workers on contracts with end dates, began arriving Thursday evening, letting them know they were being terminated the same day,” Reuters reported. “Some staff discovered they had lost access to the agency’s IT systems before receiving their termination letters.”
The sloppy and chaotic nature of the purge underscored what critics say is a reckless evisceration of government in service of a far-right ideological project.
The Post reported that the Small Business Association (SBA) “listed a paralegal phone number for laid-off employees to appeal their terminations. The number was an automated line for an apartment building.”
According to Axios, one SBA worker “received two different firing emails with attachments… each with a different reason they were being let go.”
“The first one said they were being let go because ‘you have failed to demonstrate fitness for continued federal employment,” Axios reported. “The second one hedged on the reason: ‘[Y]ou are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge, and skills do not fit the agency’s current needs and/or your performance has not been adequate to justify further employment at the agency.”
Wired reported that workers at the CFPB “were informed that they had been fired with a frenetic email” in which “some affected employees were addressed as [EmployeeFirstName][EmployeeLastName], [Job Title], [Division].”
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), who represents a large swath of federal workers, said in a statement earlier this week that “the Musk-Trump administration’s purge of the federal civil service is illegal, terrible for the country, and paves the way for increased corruption.”
“While Musk and Trump are distracting their followers with supposed ‘savings’ from these mass layoffs, which my Republican colleagues correctly note are a tiny fraction of all federal spending, they are preparing to enact tax cuts that will shower hundreds of times as much money on the rich,” said Beyer. “None of this is about saving money, it is about Musk and Trump enriching themselves and their wealthy friends while making huge cuts to services Americans depend on.”
Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
