He goes about it in a dumb way, but I do get the general idea of what he is doing... The theory being that he does not need to communicate things directly to media requests, because he can address them directly to the public through social media.

And whenever I read articles about some controversial thing around a company it either ends with "we have reached out but not heard back", or some canned response, clearly carefully crafted by the PR department. They typically do not add much of value.

I suppose it worked well enough for Tesla, and so he wants to apply it here. But Twitter is a different beast from Tesla, I'm not so sure he'll be happy with the results in the long term. He losses that buffer. That carefully crafted message that would get tacked on to every news article about the current controversy. Maybe he thinks those articles will instead include a tweet by him on whatever it is, but he is constantly putting his foot in his mouth.

Anyways, I guess I think it's a pretty bad move for him to make, but I do not think it is one that's going to harm the public in any way. PR is literally only there so the company can put out their version of the story. It never really gives any insight, just a spin.