I never attacked you, I said, quote "trump supporters" and "musk defenders". Do you identify with that? Because on one hand you say no, and on the other you say yes.
I answered your questions as best I could, but to be honest, I have very little patience on account of how stupid the questions were. I mean, it's not exactly groundbreaking news that Twitter is a dumpster fire and algorithms purposefully boost the most toxic content.
I'm working under the assumption you're playing stupid, which is actually rather charitable of me. The alternative would that you just are stupid.
But, because today I feel extra generous, I'll answer your incredibly naive question:
> Did you know you can unfollow him? How is this worse than where you get your news?
Social Media like X is specifically engineered to keep you on it via engagement. This means rage bait.
I know this because I've tried, very hard, to scrub my socials of politics. I am very disciplined, but even for me it is impossible. No matter what, I will get some pinhead saying women shouldn't vote or black people are genetically inferior. I can unfollow, I can click "not interested", doesn't matter.
The algorithm will, eventually, go back into showing me the most vile content imaginable, almost always extreme right-wing content.
The reason why is obvious - this content is extremely controversial and garners the most retention. Nobody cares about rainbows and butterflies, they care about skinheads and rapists.
The news, at least, does not feature this kind of content. The news, also, typically does not outright lie. Musk outright lies, almost always, but he's one example. If you go through the timeline of the typical right-wing pundit, almost none of their tweets are true.
The news isn't going to tell me Haitian immigrants are eating cats and dogs. Twitter, and evidently the president elect, will.