There have been reactions from concerned persons all over the world after CEO of Tesla motors, Elon Musk took over Twitter.

The reactions from some Twitter users have gone beyond comments but transcended to interesting debates like: some of them leaving the platform, allowing misinformation, disinformation, abuse and hate speech to flourish on the website more than it already does, amidst others, CNN reports.

Sources also revealed that the long-awaited deal started with a bid from the renowned entrepreneur to buy the social media company.

While the discussions and comments continue, the Billionaire has revealed that the reason for the $44bn takeover of Twitter is to revamp the social media platform.

Interestingly, there is a thin line between Musk’s justification for his bid and the reasons people are thinking of leaving, since one of the reasons mentioned was abuse of the platform.

But will Musk’s suggestion as a “free speech absolutist” be the solution to the comments and reasons like: misinformation, disinformation, abuse and hate speech to flourish on the website more than it already does, mentioned above?

However, there is another angle to all the reactions as the speculation over who and what will be allowed back on Twitter, especially, US president Donald Trump returning to the platform, as he has already hosed down that talk.

According to The Guardian, view of Australian lobby group Digital Rights Watch was that while Musk claims the takeover is about free speech, it’s actually about power.

chair Lizzie O’Shea said, “While free speech is important, you have to account for asymmetries of power and other barriers that stop people from speaking freely,”

“Musk’s style of free speech absolutism will tilt the scales in favour of the rich and powerful who can silence or bully critics. What Musk really seems to want is freedom from accountability.

“Musk’s proposed approach to content moderation will likely make Twitter a less safe place for many people to speak freely while allowing powerful disinformation and propaganda campaigns to spread unchecked.”

As for Electronic Frontiers Foundation, any move away from allowing anonymous accounts on the platform would have the effect of reducing free speech.

“Pseudonymity and anonymity are essential to protecting users who may have opinions, identities, or interests that do not align with those in power,” EFF said.

“Political dissidents may be in grave danger if those in power are able to discover their true identities.”

Morgan Stanley is the investment bank of choice for the world’s richest man for his  $44 billion acquisition of Twitter.

The bank also helped secure $25.5 billion in funding for the deal, including $12.5 billion in loans that use Musk’s Tesla stock as collateral.