Elon Musk creates another company: 'Pravda' would rate journalists' credibility

Elon Musk had a bit of a meltdown on Twitter this week as the media reported troubles at Tesla, including missing production goals and clashing with the government about the infamous autopilot crash that happened with a Tesla car a few months ago. 


In said meltdown, he went after the press, suggesting he might create a system to rate the media and name the site Pravda—which was the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and is today run by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. It also means “truth.”


WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 03: SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk (L) talks with White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon at the beginning of a policy forum with U.S. President Donald Trump in the State Dining Room at the White House February 3, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

In response, Twitter had a field day of sorts, from this:


To this:


Ouch.

Pravda Corp was, in fact, incorporated by a Musk associate late last year.

Some other folks also jumped in, like Timothy Carr, Sr. Director of Strategy for the advocacy group Free Press, gave this in a statement to CNN: 

"The last thing we need is another rich and powerful dude threatening to silence any journalist who doesn't see things his way. The implication in Musk's actions are that all news media are untrustworthy. That's a shameful message to be spreading."

Algorithmic catastrophe: How news feeds reprogram your mind and habits

The most powerful editors in the world? Algorithms.

Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • According to a Pew Research poll, 45% of U.S. adults get at least some of their news from Facebook, with half of that amount using Facebook as their only news outlet.
  • Algorithms on social media pick what people read. There's worry that social media algorithms are creating filter bubbles, so that they never have to read something they don't agree with and thus cause tribal thinking and confirmation bias.
  • The Charles Koch Foundation is committed to understanding what drives intolerance and the best ways to cure it. The foundation supports interdisciplinary research to overcome intolerance, new models for peaceful interactions, and experiments that can heal fractured communities. For more information, visit charleskochfoundation.org/courageous-collaborations.
  • The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Keep reading Show less

Psychological gym experiment proves the power of mind over matter

It isn't mind over matter as much as mind properly working with matter.

DENVER, CO - MAY 16: Brian and Monica Folts workout on treadmills at Colorado Athletic Club Tabor Center on May 16, 2018 in Denver, Colorado. The couple runs marathons and compete in Ironman triathlons and train on on treadmills. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post via Getty Images)
Mind & Brain
  • A new Stanford study finds believing you have genetic predispositions for obesity and low exercise endurance changes your physiology.
  • Participants told they had a protective obesity gene had a better response than those told they did not, even if they did not actually have the gene.
  • Runners performed poorly after learning they did not have the gene for endurance, even if they actually have the gene.
Keep reading Show less

Why this 2015 NASA study is beloved by climate change skeptics

The findings of the controversial study flew in the face of past research on ice gains in Antarctica.

NASA
Politics & Current Affairs
  • A 2015 NASA study caused major controversy by claiming that Antarctica was gaining more ice than it was losing.
  • The study said that ice gains in East Antarctica were effectively canceling out ice losses in the western region of the continent.
  • Since 2015, multiple studies have shown that Antarctica is losing more ice than it's gaining, though the 2015 study remains a favorite of climate change doubters to this day.
Keep reading Show less