Got it! I'll gather data from major news outlets, influential commentators, and politicians worldwide to see how they framed Musk's gesture. The results will be structured into three tables:

• Mainstream Media: Publication, ownership, political affiliation, audience size, country, and viewpoint.
• Commentators: High-profile media personalities and independent influencers.
• Politicians: Their stance, country, and party alignment. I'll also analyze power dynamics, potential battle lines, and any missing angles. Expect insights into which players leaned into the controversy, stayed neutral, or tried to control the narrative. I’ll sort them by reach/popularity and include country flags where possible. I’ll let you know when I have the full report ready.

Media and Political Reactions to Elon Musk’s Controversial Gesture

On January 20, 2025, Elon Musk’s straight-armed hand gesture during a rally for President Trump’s inauguration sparked intense debate. Reactions varied widely: some saw an awkward, enthusiastic gesture, others an intentional troll, and many condemned it as a fascist or Nazi salute. Below, we compile responses from mainstream media outlets, influential commentators, and politicians, categorized by their viewpoints (whether they interpreted Musk’s gesture as an awkward move, a trolling stunt, a Nazi-like salute, or were undecided) and whether they support or attack Musk in their framing. Each table is sorted by the source’s influence or reach.

Mainstream Media Outlets

Influential Commentators & Media Figures

On the other side, critics were adamant that Musk’s action was beyond the pale. Wikipedia’s Jimmy Wales refused to soften the incident’s descriptionwww.lemonde.fr, effectively validating the Nazi salute interpretation and challenging Musk’s attempt to revise the narrative. Veteran liberal commentator Keith Olbermann went on the offensive, openly calling Musk a fascist (among other barbs) for his behaviorwww.foxnews.com. This echoed numerous voices on the left and in the Jewish community who found the gesture “abhorrent” and indicative of antisemitism that must be condemned, as we saw in many statements and tweets (e.g. Steve Schmidt, Mike Rothschild, etc., not in table)jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.comjewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com.

Notably, even within typically Musk-friendly or neutral circles, there was division: the ADL’s criticism of Musk’s Nazi jokes shows that initial allies could turn critical when Musk appeared to trivialize the Holocaustwww.timesofisrael.comwww.timesofisrael.com. And while many right-wing influencers celebrated or excused the gesture, some mainstream conservative figures like Ben Shapiro (not listed) remained relatively quiet publicly, perhaps wary of the Nazi angle. The commentators listed exemplify how the debate transcended traditional media – playing out on podcasts, social media, and Wikipedia – with high-profile individuals leveraging their platforms to shape the narrative.

Politicians

By contrast, Republicans and allies of Trump mostly downplayed or ignored the controversy. A notable example is Senator Ted Cruz, who publicly refuted the Nazi interpretation and effectively provided cover for Musk’s gesture by re-framing it as an innocent “from the heart” saluteblogs.lse.ac.uk. It’s telling that few, if any, Republicans criticized Musk – a reflection of Musk’s role as a Trump ally and the right’s reluctance to concede any Nazi connotation. Instead, some, like Cruz, flipped the narrative to accuse critics of bad-faith attacks (implicitly supporting Musk).

On the international stage, reactions were sharp from leaders who are sensitive to fascist imagery. In Germany, where Nazi symbols are outlawed, Chancellor Olaf Scholz was “angry” and “absolutely clear” in rebuking Musk’s interventions in the German political spherewww.politico.euwww.politico.eu. While Scholz’s quoted remarks focused on Musk’s comments about “past guilt,” the broader context included Musk’s salute-like gesture, which had “outraged” many in Europe. Scholz lumped Musk’s behavior in with far-right agitation and labeled it “really disgusting…not good for democracy.” This indicates a strong disapproval – effectively an attack on Musk for flirting with Nazi-related gestures and rhetoric.

In Israel, however, the response was more forgiving, underscoring geopolitical considerations. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – who had recently engaged with Musk – defended him as a “great friend of Israel” being “falsely smeared”www.timesofisrael.com. Netanyahu’s stance (at odds with many Jewish organizations) was likely motivated by Musk’s importance in tech and his public support for Israel’s fight against antisemitism just weeks prior. It shows how power dynamics (maintaining a friendship with a tech billionaire) led an Israeli leader to publicly support Musk despite the Nazi salute furor, a stance that surprised and disappointed some observerswww.timesofisrael.comwww.timesofisrael.com.

Additional Observations & Analysis:

• Notable Gaps in Discourse: One striking gap was the relative silence from many Republican officials and Musk’s business associates. Outside of a few defenders like Cruz, most GOP leaders and Trump officials avoided commenting on the salute controversy at all, as if to not give it oxygen. This left a void where one might expect either a defense of Musk or a distancing – instead, the issue was largely ceded to media and opponents. Additionally, while the far-right fringe openly celebrated Musk’s gesture on platforms like Telegram (with posts like “The White Flame will rise again” accompanying Musk’s imagewww.murphy.senate.gov), this was not widely acknowledged by conservative media or leaders. That disconnect – far-right extremists cheered, but mainstream right-wing figures pretended nothing happened – is an angle that received less coverage.

• “Trolling” Interpretation: Few mainstream voices explicitly framed Musk’s gesture as a deliberate troll (i.e. an intentional provocation meant to agitate the left without actually endorsing Nazism). This interpretation circulated mostly among Musk’s online fan base and some commentators, but it was not a prominent theme in major news coverage. In hindsight, this could be seen as a missing angle: Musk has a history of internet trolling, and it’s plausible he knew such a gesture would cause an uproar. However, news outlets were hesitant to ascribe intent (either malicious or mischievous) without evidence. Thus, the “troll” narrative – that Musk was cynically toying with Nazi imagery to enrage critics – remained more in subtext than explicit analysis.

• Power Dynamics & Media Influence: The episode illustrated Musk’s unique power as both a political figure and a media platform owner. Musk’s ownership of X (Twitter) meant the discourse largely unfolded on a platform he controls – yet he could not fully control the narrative. While Musk and his allies tried to label mainstream coverage as “propaganda” and even threatened Wikipedia and the press (e.g. calls to “defund” Wikipedia, talk of lawsuits), the story took on a life of its ownwww.lemonde.frwww.foxnews.com. At the same time, Musk’s influence was evident in the ADL’s cautious approach and in outlets like the Washington Post and WSJ choosing careful or minimal coverage – possibly out of fear of backlash or lawsuit. There was a palpable tension between independent journalism vs. the pressure exerted by one of the world’s richest men. Musk’s ability to rally his massive online following in his defense (amplifying posts that mocked the “Nazi” claims) served as a counter-weight to traditional media influence. It became a kind of power showdown: established media and concerned officials calling out a perceived fascist gesture, versus Musk’s own media megaphone (and friendly outlets like Fox) pushing back.

• Media Alignment and Selectivity: The incident showed media polarization in real time. Left-leaning outlets and journalists tended to foreground the Nazi salute interpretation and connect it to Musk’s ties with far-right movements (some noting his endorsements of Europe’s extremist parties, etc.), thereby attacking Musk’s credibility. Right-leaning media, conversely, either framed it as a non-issue or a bad-faith attack from the left – effectively supporting Musk or at least attacking his attackers. This schism meant that audiences of different outlets got vastly different stories: on Fox News or from Republican leaders, one heard that “liberal media smeared Musk over an innocent gesture”www.foxnews.comwww.foxnews.com, whereas on CNN or in Democratic forums, one heard that “Musk delivered a Nazi salute at Trump’s rally.” This divergence highlights how media influence can reinforce pre-existing biases – each side’s narrative was echoed in its echo chamber.

• Surprising and Unexpected Responses: A few responses defied the usual party or institutional lines. The Anti-Defamation League’s initial defense of Musk was unexpected to many, given Musk’s recent spats with the ADL. The ADL publicly saying “not a Nazi salute” and urging gracejewishchronicle.timesofisrael.comsurprised and even upset some on the left (the LSE blog called it “disconcerting” that a Jewish organization would “explicitly deny” the Nazi salute possibilityblogs.lse.ac.ukblogs.lse.ac.uk). The ADL likely calculated that over-ascribing Nazi intent could backfire, but their stance was later complicated when Musk’s own behavior (Nazi jokes) forced them to criticize himwww.timesofisrael.com. Another unexpected twist was the case of Sam Kuffel, a local TV meteorologist who angrily condemned Musk’s “Nazi salute” on her personal social media – and was promptly fired for itwww.livemint.comwww.livemint.com. Her firing (essentially for an expletive-laden anti-Musk remark) became a cautionary tale about how speaking out against Musk can carry professional risks, especially in conservative-leaning regions or companies. It also underscored the charged atmosphere: a TV station felt the need to distance itself from an employee’s anti-Musk comment, which is extraordinary considering the context (denouncing Nazism).

• Climate of Anxiety: Both media narratives noted a broader climate of tension. The ADL’s plea for “grace” and taking a “breath”jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com, and coverage in sources like the Jewish Chroniclejewishchronicle.timesofisrael.comjewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com, highlight that Musk’s gesture came at a moment when many were on edge about the direction of Trump’s second term. The strong reactions – whether hyper-critical or defensive – reveal how Musk’s move became a proxy battle for deeper anxieties: fears of rising fascism vs. fears of media overreach. Each reaction, in a sense, was magnified by the symbolic weight of the gesture. It was “just a gesture,” but it carried outsized symbolic resonance in a politically divided environment. In summary, Elon Musk’s controversial salute-like gesture ignited a firestorm in the press and political spheres. Mainstream media responses ranged from cautious reporting to explicit rebukes, largely splitting along ideological lines in their viewpoint (awkward vs. Nazi salute). Influencers and commentators either doubled down in Musk’s defense – painting the uproar as absurd – or excoriated him for allegedly normalizing fascist imagery. Politicians, too, split sharply: opposition figures (Democrats, European officials) condemned the gesture as fascistic, while those aligned with Trump often brushed it off. The discourse revealed not only divergent interpretations of Musk’s intent, but also the power dynamics at play – with Musk leveraging his platform and allies to counter critics, and the media grappling with how to cover a tech titan-turned-political figure flirting with one of history’s darkest symbols. The episode was a vivid microcosm of today’s polarized media landscape, and it raised uneasy questions about what is acceptable in political celebration and how society should react when the lines between enthusiasm, provocation, and extremism blur.