I wonder why the richest man in the world says he's about free speech. He lives in a country that considers money to be speech. He has the most speech of anyone, but that's not it surely.
He says he's about free speech because he agreed with the kinds of speech that get excluded from civil discussion. He considered people getting shunned for racist opinions to be censorship, while he considers terminating the accounts of anyone who disagrees with him to be his prerogative and perfectly fair.
Elon Musk has never actually stood for "Free Speech," only for the speech he likes. He SAYS he likes free speech purely because it has better optics for him and worse optics for his opposition than "Let me say racist things."
It's the sort of thing I might do if I were so rich that I could burn tens of billions of dollars to run a major corporation just for fun. I mean, saying "get lost" to the government of a country of over 200 million people must be quite a rush.
Yeah, if twitter was run by a principled individual who actually was a free speech absolutist, I would be siding twitter. If twitter was anything other then an advertising platform, I would be siding with twitter. If twitter wasn't censoring news orgs that criticized Musk, I would be siding with twitter.
My country has hate speech laws and 99.9% of us aren't concerned or yelling "censorship!", because 99.9% of us aren't running around saying hateful shit that would get us arrested for hate speech. Only a racist is worried about being cancelled for racism, only a bigot is concerned about hate speech laws.
I don't think that works as a blanket statement, for example Australia has a law allowing takedowns for hate speech but it was recently used to censor a journalist who shared a video of an Isreal leader saying from the "river to the sea".
But in general, yes, censor hate and uphold journalistic integrity and freedom of the press in equal measures.