While he was always an asshole, everyone has some ratio of bad/good. In the early/mid 2010s he was able to keep enough of a lid on things that he had a positive reputation with among both the public and investors.
Back then he still had his handler/business mommy Mary Beth Brown. She had basic control over his scheduling and publicity outreach since he started Tesla. In 2014 he canned her after she asked for a raise, he's been handling his own pr and schedule ever since.
The problem with assuming that this is a recent change in personality is that it requires ignoring all his prior reported behaviour. It ignores how much media marketing actually changes our perceptions of powerful people.
No Elon did not become an asinine child overnight, he's been that way the whole time. He just believes he's now rich enough that he doesn't have to pretend to be a different person. No JFK Jr did not become an insane person because he watched too much fox news, he's literally been eating roadkill since he was a child.
All of these wealthy and powerful people have an entire system working for them dedicated to protecting their public image.
That's typically how investigations work.... There's an accusation, and then an investigation to find evidence that supports the claim. They aren't using people as a source for the claim, they're using the evidence the people gathered.
You on the other hand seem to be focused on who gathered the information instead of what they gathered.
This is anecdotal evidence from a political organization that has a well established history of ignoring the plight of specific Islamic ethnic minorities, including the Kurds in Syria and Turkey, the Ahwaz in Iran, the Hazaras in Afghanistan, the 'Al-Akhdam' in Yemen, and the Berbers in Algeria.
Again, anecdotal evidence which does not detail the accusations, nor how their experience contradicts that accusation.
Using this as "evidence" is just academically dishonest. The "team" was a single bank manager, and the "investigation's" scope was solely to insure that a 50m dollar loan for 3 different schools were not being used to commit crimes against humanity.
The bank claimed that the specific schools they investigated did not substantiate the allegations, however they found enough to decide they wanted to minimize the project.
"In light of the risks associated with the partner schools, which are widely dispersed and difficult to monitor, the scope and footprint of the project is being reduced. Specifically, the project component that involves the partner schools in Xinjiang is being closed."
I think you are forgetting the accusations of the population control of an ethnic minority. "The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which lists birth prevention targeting an ethnic group as one act that could qualify as genocide."
Again, a logical fallacy. Just because America has participated in genocide does not mean that China cannot also participate in genocide or crimes against humanity.
Another logical fallacy.... You are attacking the man, not the evidence or argument.
The vast majority of the evidence he's gathered for his peer reviewed study are gathered directly from public data released by the Chinese government. There have also been some data from a leaked cable, which have been validated by multiple investigative bodies of journalists across the world.
This is a biased interpretation of materialism. A similarly biased claim based on materialism would be that the Belt and Roads initiative motivated china to ethnically cleanse a region vital to the initiative.
On a personal note, I don't think the lable of genocide is really important. What is important is that an ethnic minority is being abused by a State. And while there is a lot of misinformation and politicing surrounding the topic, there's still an alarming amount of data that suggest China is forcibly assimilating an ethnic minority group.