Fears that Twitter under Musk could become ‘proverbial Wild West’
Elon Musk’s vow to let everyone say whatever they want on Twitter after his takeover of the social media giant could put the onus on users to combat bullying and misinformation on the platform, experts say.
Details of Musk’s plans for Twitter were slim after his deal to buy the tech firm was announced this week, but the Tesla chief portrays himself as a free-speech absolutist.
The privatisation of Twitter with Musk as its master has raised concerns from analysts and activists that the site will be ruled capriciously by the world’s richest man, with more focus on attention and profit than on promoting healthy online conversations, which has been a priority at the service.
For Kyla Garrett Wagner, assistant professor of communications law at Syracuse University in New York state, Musk’s takeover is not a victory for free-speech rights.
“What we have done is put even more power into fewer hands,” she says. “If Elon Musk decides tomorrow that he wants to shut Twitter down for a week, he can do that.”
She notes the US Constitution’s first amendment only bars governments from gagging what the country’s citizens say – leaving the billionaire entrepreneur the power to decide what can and cannot be posted.
“This is not the street corner,” Garrett Wagner says. “This is the proverbial Wild West but owned by a minority elite that doesn’t represent minority voices.”
Musk’s promised hands-off approach to content is a particularly thorny matter when it comes to high-profile cases like that of former US president Donald Trump, who was banned from Twitter after an assault on the US Capitol by his supporters.
“Musk says he is going to turn Twitter into a social media platform with no moderation; there have been several of those and they don’t work,” says analyst Rob Enderle of Enderle Group.
“The trolls take over, they get too hostile and drive people away.”
Musk has said he is averse to banning people from Twitter because of misbehaviour, prompting speculation that he would lift Trump’s ban.
But Trump has said he would not be returning to Twitter even if his account were reinstated, saying he would stick to his own site, Truth Social.
If Musk pulls back on policing content at Twitter, advertisers would have to take the lead to ensure their messages were not associated with toxic content, advocates and academics say.
“Accountability now rests with Twitter’s top advertisers, who need to make it clear that if Twitter becomes a free-for-all of hate, extremism and disinformation, they will walk,” says non-profit organisation Media Matters for America chief Angelo Carusone.
“It is also critical that Google and Apple hold Twitter to the same standards they applied to other apps like Parler,” he adds, referring to a social network popular among conservatives. The tech giants would need to reiterate “Twitter will not get special treatment and that a violation of their terms of service will result in the platform being removed from the app stores”, Carusone says.
Musk will also face tough judgment from the public, with Twitter users apt to turn away from it if it becomes hostile and flooded with misinformation, Garrett Wagner says. Some of Musk’s own tweets have raised eyebrows; he once mocked a Tesla whistle-blower and in 2018 called a rescuer who criticised a plan to save children from a flooded cave in Thailand “a pedo guy”.
While Musk has talked about ridding Twitter of software “bots” that fire off spam, actually confirming that users are living people could prove challenging, Baird analyst Colin Sebastian says.
Sebastian says Musk’s idea of charging for the coveted blue ticks that verify users’ identities is a “no-brainer”, but it is likely only a small minority of people would pay for the status.
Musk also believes anyone should be able to scrutinise the software behind the service. But that kind of transparency could come with the unintended consequence that it will just be exploited by “bad actors” who find ways to game the system to promote their posts, analysts warn.
“The rhetoric around transparency is that it will lead to an epiphany and people will change,” Garrett Wagner says. “It’s a misleading comfort to think everything will be OK if we know how it is working.”
What we have done is put even more power into fewer hands
KYLA GARRETT WAGNER, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY