Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, has been embroiled in a public dispute with the New York Times over the publication of an article alleging that his drug use during the 2024 election campaign was more intense than previously known. The article, which was published in May, cited private messages sent to the Times and interviews with over a dozen people who have known or worked with Musk. According to the report, Musk was taking large quantities of ketamine, a powerful anesthetic that can affect the bladder, as well as Ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms. He was also found to have a medication box containing around 20 pills, including Adderall, a stimulant. The Times’ report claimed that Musk’s drug use was ‘more intense’ than publicly known and that the information was based on thorough research.
In response, Musk took to his X account to challenge the New York Times, posting the results of his recent drug test which he argued would disprove the allegations. The Times, however, has remained steadfast in its position, with their communications team stating that Musk was ‘continuing to lash out’ at them and that the report was based on solid evidence and interviews with multiple sources. The Times emphasized that they had provided Musk with multiple opportunities to respond to the article before its publication, and he had declined to do so, instead opting to use social media to dismiss the report.
The dispute between Musk and the New York Times has been ongoing since the article’s publication. A day after the article was released, Musk took to X to accuse the Times of ‘lying their a– off,’ claiming that he had not used ketamine in years. The Times, in turn, accused Musk of ‘lashing out’ without evidence, with their article stating that Musk’s denials lacked substance and were based on no proof. The Times’ communications team highlighted that the report was thoroughly sourced, citing interviews with several individuals and photographic evidence of the medication box. They also pointed out that Musk had not provided any credible evidence to counter the allegations, despite the opportunity to do so.
The controversy has sparked wider discussions about the intersection of celebrity, media reporting, and public perception. As Musk continues to engage with the media, the situation highlights the challenges of verifying information and the role of investigative journalism in exposing potential misconduct. The New York Times’ defense of its reporting underscores its commitment to journalistic integrity, while Musk’s public defiance reflects his own approach to media scrutiny. The situation also raises questions about the personal lives of public figures and how their private behavior is presented to the public, especially in the context of a high-profile political figure with significant influence and a substantial following.
Despite the media attention, Musk has maintained his position that the allegations are false and that he has not engaged in the drug use described in the article. The ongoing debate has attracted attention from both supporters and critics of Musk, with some questioning the validity of the report and others condemning the alleged behavior. The case also highlights the broader issues of media accountability, the role of social media in shaping public opinion, and the complexities of reporting on private matters of public interest.
The situation has not only affected Musk and the Times but has also drawn the attention of the broader public and media. As the debate continues, the outcome could have implications for how such stories are reported in the future and how public figures respond to media scrutiny. The Times has emphasized that its reporting was based on verified sources, while Musk has defended his character and the accuracy of his statements. As the controversy unfolds, the issue remains one of the most significant media and political stories of the year.