After over half a year’s worth of Elon Musk’s Twitter, the social media platform once heralded for being the world’s digital town square has become merely a joke. With a new CEO and competing array of social platforms, how will the blue bird last in the next few years?
Despite the fact that Twitter boasts nearly 450 million monthly users as of this year, the hellscape that has ensued over the past months both within the company and in the product thanks to Elon Musk’s acquisition, is evident of its collapse. Not only have millions already deactivated their accounts, (with over 1 million departing within the first week of Musk’s takeover), but the company is also said to have a valuation of less than half as much compared to Musk’s purchase price of $44 billion. With a mass exodus by many employees and executives either fired or due to fear for the direction of the company, what’s left is the stark contrast between a social platform once used for professional discussion of important topics and the implementation of Musk’s mind of mayhem.
Back in October, when Elon Musk first took over the social media platform, a great deal of acquisitional turbulence was in effect. While he had originally planned on purchasing the company in agreement with executives in an ample offer of $44 billion, Musk went back on it with claims of breaches in the agreement. Despite the back and forth however, Elon Musk soon became beholden to Twitter over its own accusations against his withdrawal from an acquisition. So on October 27, 2022, the ever-controversial Tesla and SpaceX CEO abruptly became the owner of one of the largest social media platforms in the world. And the response was almost immediate.
Not only did big names such as Whoopi Goldberg and Elton John exit due to the takeover, but thousands more deactivated their accounts. Hoping to restore figures like former president Donald Trump and far right social media influencer Andrew Tate, Musk’s slogan “Vox Populi, Vox Dei”, (meaning "the voice of the people is the voice of God"), became the theme of his assumption. Not only that, however, Musk also brought in more controversy at the start of his reign of Twitter for banning comedian Kathy Griffin from her account. Griffin, who had been censored by him after impersonating his account by changing her profile name to Elon Musk, is a staunch leftist who has nevertheless made a name for herself over the years. Between her posing with an image of a beheaded Donald Trump to her endless slough of controversies over the years, her outspokenness has often gotten her on the forefront of media attention, making her a prime target for Elon Musk’s inner conservatism. And while her account was only suspended for a matter of days, the same man who once wrote “the extreme antibody reaction from those who fear free speech says it all” in condemnation of censorship, only fell victim to his own hypocrisy.
However, this brings to a larger point about censorship as a whole. As something that is a very relevant issue in this day in age of social media, the inter-weavings between what is and isn't protected under the 1st amendment has brought criticism by many. Between things like fake news and hate speech, having a platform which is 100% tolerant of any form of such content, whether it be harmful or not, could pose just as large a risk as censoring every opposing detail such as that in more totalitarian states like Russia and North Korea. Not only does a platform like Twitter, which often brings out the worst in people’s thoughts due to the barrier of a screen compared to face-to-face conversations, pose great harm if unchecked, but incidents such as the spread of false information and outright bullying of marginalized groups have only risen on the platform since his takeover. Similar to how many philosophers have argued that there is no one right form of government but that democracy is often the least worst one, the issue of free speech vs censorship falls in line with this saying. On one hand, an outright dictatorship which operates off of censorship eliminates the valuable exchange of more than one opinion, restricting thoughts and expression. However, on the other hand, a free for all in which society is able to mock or spread falsehoods is equally dangerous and history has only proven how quick people as a whole come to target others.
If Twitter hopes to change their direction in the next few years, perhaps a revamp on their censorship implementations should be looked at. And while it appears that Elon Musk will be limiting his role with his instatement of a new CEO, if the company itself truly wants to stay on its feet and compete with a greater market of only growing social media platforms, it and the industry at whole must come to terms with their own limitations on free speech. Otherwise, like the direction of Elon Musk’s Twitter, society and social media are doomed for a world of mayhem and mindless arguments in which the innermost ugly part of people comes out.
Comments