I’m not going to jump on the bandwagon and start panicking about what Elon Musk’s ‘absolutist’ view on free speech might mean for Twitter’s content moderation efforts. We have probably all heard already a bunch of fearful articles about how disinformation, misinformation, and overall, hatred, might escalate on the platform, and how this potential negative change in tone might lead to a toxic environment leading to even greater social divisions. However, even if these concerns were completely realized, I still wouldn’t consider the current approach constructive and beneficial at all because instead of showing how an alternative world should look like, one based on understanding and empathy towards each other, all those criticizing Musk’s current endeavor are doing so from a completely biased, judgmental position, completely devoid of the aim to start a conversation and bring a solution forward. These people are rather similar to those at the focus of their criticism, just shouting slurs and jabs at each other without the intent to understand where someone with a different perspective might be coming from. Nevertheless, I’m not here today to point out all the flaws in our Twitter-criticizing approach because that’s an article topic for tomorrow, and instead would rather highlight what Musk himself is doing wrong, even though initially, the first time this takeover was proposed, I really wanted to support what he was getting into.
Musk is Marching into the Right Battle but with the Wrong Army
I had this idea to come up with some cool symbolism here, to set a really metaphorical tone, however, I must stress that I actually disagree with all battle-seeking efforts because such a mindset can never lead to a victory for all. It’s about crushing the other side, a rather anti-democratic endeavor, an unimaginative and exclusive tool where a community loses a good chunk of its precious souls, so it is something overall destructive we should only turn to as a last resort. But back to Elon Musk and his army of trolls. Wait, I’m jumping ahead instead of carefully building up my point. So, let me slow down and tell you how I see the situation.
I’m all in for putting an end to the Orwellian constraints wokism (Is this really the word I’m looking for? Because it seems like I have an issue with Asian cuisine which I do not!) has brought forth because I consider the idea of a group of people deciding whether what one has to say is right or wrong as fundamentally contradictory to the grander vision of freedom for all. I do want the world to realize that this current direction with content moderation is a really dangerous move towards authoritarian control, and even if we could stay neutral and truly objective in our moderating efforts instead of one side silencing the other, it would still not fix the problem it is trying to solve, that being our propensity to spread false news and be hateful. That’s a flaw of the human condition that is present in us regardless of our ability to voice our opinions on social platforms. So, content moderation is like those room cleaning efforts where we push everything under the rug instead of bringing actual cleanness to the room.
This is where I share Elon Musk’s opinion. I wouldn’t go as far as to call Twitter the “de facto public town square” of society “where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated”, as the microblogging platform is known to be a few-to-many service with only a tiny minority of users talking while the rest is voicelessly listening, so there’s not much debating, but the recognition that having an ancient agora-resembling place for open-minded debates involving all members of society is something I can definitely agree with. And such an open place can indeed not exist with controls over what people can say because even if we don’t like it, both hatred and the yearning to spread false things are legit feelings, feelings people for different reasons might be harboring, and so for these aberrations to disappear, something in society has to change, something only a two-sided debate can fix.
So yeah, free speech is a great thing, or well, a much-needed thing despite all the pain and complications it might be causing because it is the only way for ALL members of society to participate in the conversation about how things should be improving in order to accommodate the wishes and preferences of everybody. BUT, the fact that we are willing to suffer the bullshit of everybody doesn’t mean that we actually support what we are hearing. This is a crucial element of free speech, something that cannot be mistaken for a ‘free speech absolutist’ supporting all the extreme opinions that are allowed to be stated. However, I often feel from what I see that people, on both sides actually, forget to make this difference between ‘bearing to hear something’ and ‘supporting what is being stated’, and this mixing up the two leads to all the confusion and panicking that surround those marching under the banner of Free Speech.
And the truth is, under today’s terms, I actually understand the worries of those fearing the championing of free speech because today’s free speech enthusiasts do make the mistake of actually siding with the wrong voices. Voices that are still wrong even if they are under the protection of free speech. Just think about the “MAGA” (btw, for those of you who are as bad in riddles as I’m, MAGA stands for “Make America Great Again” – I couldn’t figure this out myself, so for ages I had no clue what Biden was referencing in his very moving [actually moving – I’m serious here] speeches on the dire state of American democracy) Republicans in American politics.
Yes, the content moderation teams of the biggest tech platforms and media in general are indeed left-leaning, and they do have the tendency to silence those questioning the direction the world is taking, a serious hindrance to a much-needed discussion about where society should be going. But embracing election denialism? Without any proof except the words of a crazy old man and saboteurs determined to break American politics? Are you guys stupid? Seriously, grown-ups devoting their lives’ legacies to such a stupid message as the “Election was stolen”, and then going about and repeating it. Siding with Donald Trump and the weirdest candidates the ‘kingmaker’ has picked doesn’t equal free speech. That’s indeed nothing more than shifting towards the extreme.
Elon Musk, in his efforts to be a beacon of free speech and a visionary in pursuit of the well-deserved liberty of humanity, is making similar mistakes. I don’t actually follow his tweets, so I’m not saying that he is personally endorsing anything stupid – even though, if my memory is correct, he does dabble with sharing groundless conspiracies which is not at all the smartest of things – but he is definitely not distancing himself from those injecting their venom into society. As a result of this, without him responsibly addressing the over 100 million people who are adoring him, and the many other extremists who look at him as the savior who can free them from their “Twitter jail”, sexists and racists can indeed feel emboldened by him and think that this takeover is the beginning of their era when their lies and hatred can once again be spread to all corners of society under the blessing of the person who has enabled this ‘positive’ change.
The issue with Elon Musk is that he is still just a supposedly ‘funny’ guy constantly joking and trolling. Even if everything he does is just him being distracting so that in the background he can succeed with his grand schemes, the truth is, unfortunately, the guy has amassed an insane followership, and that does mean that he deals with different levels of responsibility than the ordinary kid on the street just pranking his peers. But he doesn’t seem to realize this, not at least when it comes to knocking some sense into society. With crypto hints he was amazing, he was fascinatingly aware of the influence he was wielding, but now, when it comes to different tribes of society jumping at each other’s throats as Twitter’s content control is intentionally waning, he is remaining the same irresponsible troll he has always been instead of critically evaluating the hoards of haters his ‘jokes’ are encouraging. And given the dire state public discussion is in, with everyone so eager to jump at each other instead of seeking understanding, his current sticking with his old ‘funny’ ways is a real failing of him.
Similarly to the Republican Party embracing outcasts, haters, and hypocrites in their bid to be the ones defending American democracy, liberty, and free speech, Elon Musk is marching into battle against the liberal elite with the worst allies he could have picked. Instead of stressing his distance from haters and racists, who will nevertheless enjoy the protection of free speech, he is rallying together with them against those currently rightfully fearing this surging anger wave. Freeing a social media platform from the yoke of liberal constraints was the right fight to pick because the direction these platforms had been taking for the past several years was indeed bordering Orwell’s dystopian story with “Thought Crime” and Big Brother watching over every step we take. However, this fight could have been carried out without siding with those whose message got reasonably prohibited under the previous cultural regime. All it would have required is a simple disclaimer towards haters and misinformation campaigns that “You guys are insane” while still supporting free speech. But no, this hasn’t yet taken place, and while there were remarks trying to calm advertising agencies and civil right groups by saying that content moderation will remain the same, for the most part, formerly banned voices can, with reason, think that they have a partner in crime in him.
Long story short, all I’m saying is that Musk should highlight this difference between supporting free speech with all the costs it comes with and actually supporting all the hateful nonsense that is being uttered in the name of free speech because those two are not at all the same things. Right now, with his current approach, he is less of a champion of something great and more like a spineless BMW dealership selling its cars to gangsters and other low-quality members of society because of which anyone with a bit of grace would never buy a BMW, no matter the amazing specs it comes with. This lack of selection when it comes to picking the allies to march with is something so many causes pursuing the right thing are grappling with, and for the moment, they are failing. And this is a crucial and very consequential mistake because this way, even in pursuit of the right thing, one will justifiably fail because the wrong ‘friends’ will poison even the greatest of missions, regardless of their purity.
Right now, it’s Elon Musk with his Twitter takeover and the idiots he is emboldening who are building a really weak case against cancel culture, even though, with a bit of sense, we should all agree to drop it because it only leads to misery and offence seeking. However, if we continue this way, if we continue getting mixed up with the wrong parties, other things, more important things like tackling climate change might go down the drain, and those might be issues where we can’t afford to fail.
So, guys, pick better friends because you don’t want to walk around with the wrong baggage.
