Twitter has undergone a transformation after Elon Musk took over the platform, and there are reportedly scores of users that are leaving the social media site. But why should we be concerned?
It’s because most of our political leaders and other prominent personalities have Twitter accounts, among other things, that makes Twitter part of our own reality. They make use of Twitter to reach the public at a moment’s notice.
Other celebrities and prominent persons are on Twitter too, and this includes celebrities in show business, the arts, sportsmen and the lot.
So Twitter is by no means all about Elon Musk and the Americans. But the purchase of the platform by Musk has set the cat among the pigeons, to use a timeworn idiom for want of a better one at this moment.
Why are many users particularly in the US and in Europe leaving the platform? They feel that Musk may unleash undesirable elements on Twitter because he is some sort of free-speech absolutist.
However Musk says that he is not a free speech absolutist and that he is for encouraging free speech with a reasonable amount of moderation. To this end he has appointed some sort of Council of Moderators — shall we say a Censor Board of sorts, to use the local idiom.
UNCEREMONIOUSLY
Onetime owner of Twitter Jack Dorsey is supporting Musk, stating that he overreached and spent too much on the platform and that it became an untenable business model, at which point he left the organisation. He has apologized for this and stated that Musk who is retrenching employees is on the right path.
Basically the Twitter battle seems to be between the far-right and the far-left in the US in some ways. Musk has somehow come to identify himself with some of the right-wing’s extremities even though he is by no means a rabid far-right figure. But he is not popular for saying that he may allow the former President Donald Trump to come back on Twitter, a platform that unceremoniously gave the latter marching orders.
But then this tug o’ war between the far-right and the left, the far-left if you would in the US, has been going on for a long time and has not been manifested on Twitter only. It’s a reality everywhere in the US, and you could say in most parts of the West these days including Europe.
The far-right is of the view shorn of all that is said about the same issue in polite society and in academic forums that it’s being censored by the far-left. The far-right feels that under the guise of banning hate speech the far-left has made sure that their rights to free-speech have been taken away.
DIMENSION
Enter Elon Musk, and much is being made about how he would reverse the tide and ensure that everybody would have an equally accessible platform irrespective of their political allegiances.
However the fact that a platform such as this which is used by our President, our Leader of the Opposition and thousands of politicians and leaders from so many other countries is run by a billionaire businessman is probably not a good sign of the times.
 |
| Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey |
It is true that the media has always been owned by and large by capitalists, and in this country it is said that a few families owned media establishments even though that situation is considerably changed now. But compared to this, a billionaire running a platform that is used all over the world, represents a different dimension if you will, of the influence of capital on the media landscape.
In Sri Lanka, Twitter users would probably not feel any difference whether Musk is the owner of Twitter or not. Those far-right and far-left dynamics don’t not operate here, and there is no debate here in Sri Lanka about the far-left trying to stomp on the free speech rights of the far-right, whether that’s the truth or not in other countries.
But the fact that Musk is making far reaching changes towards making Twitter a more profitable business proposition is having an impact on all types of users. For example, Taslima Nasrin the author of Bangladeshi origin who was reviled by Muslims in her country for her book Lajja has stated that she is not going to pay a subscription to keep her blue-check badge of authenticity — the Twitter certificate that certifies that a given user is indeed that person and not an impersonator.
So when capitalist dynamics are in operation it affects users of huge platforms such as Twitter that have a very wide reach all over the world. The question is, are there any other platforms similar to Twitter that users of Twitter that are disillusioned are willing to migrate to? Probably not at the moment.
Of course there are other platforms with names such as Mastodon etc. but they are not anywhere near as popular as Twitter, and do not have the popular appeal of Twitter to a wide range of users. So it’s all about reach. Users that are disillusioned may want to leave the platform, but they find that with other alternatives they are bound to lose much of their audience.
That being the case, many who are identified as on the left of the political spectrum would not leave the platform even though they would grumble and complain that Musk is not the type of person that they want as head of the organisation that runs the platform.
Some users left the platform as soon as it was announced that Musk was taking over, and this was rather stunning to see because they did not so much as wait to find out what the new owner would be doing with his acquisition. But questions have been raised about the adverse reaction to Musk when there were no protests previously about the way Twitter was run by other businessmen in the past.
Musk is controversial but more than being that, he is seen as an outsider of sorts that does not follow the orthodox line of the Establishment.
That’s the beef of the critics with him and the source of their horrified reaction that here is a man who is unpredictable running an important social media platform.
IRONICAL
No doubt with him around as the owner, there would be much more excitement about what Twitter is going to become, whether anybody likes it or not. He is a person known to make things happen, because he is generally innovative and has a penchant for making spectacular moves. Perhaps over time all the anxieties about the Musk takeover of Twitter would be forgotten and the many uses from all locations in the political spectrum would be happy to use the platform no matter who is in charge. In other words, over time they may probably forget who heads Twitter altogether because it would be one of those things — yes, Musk would be in charge and life would go on in the Twitter space.
Overall the reaction in conventional media for instance about the Musk takeover has been rather negative. It can be said that negative articles have been more the norm than the exception. But in social media the reaction has not been so lopsided. To many, this could be an affirmation of the fact that social media is what it is — it is still unconventional compared to the regular so-called traditional sources of information.
Is Musk a sign that social media would not compromise that position and that no matter what happens there would be a media site in which there is relatively less control from various types of Managements? If that is so, it is ironic that the saviour of social media, if that’s what Musk’s takeover signifies, is a billionaire — the ultimate capitalist though he styles himself as anti-establishment. How can a capitalist be anything other than the epitome of the Establishment? Good question, and the answer that follows from it is that it is likely that despite all the accompanying noise, Musk’s takeover will not affect Twitter that much in the final analysis.
Add new comment