Tyrant, Narcissist, Aristocrat – words that seem to describe Elon Musk in the present day; nevertheless, his recent acquisition of the social media giant, Twitter, has not only rippled waves throughout the whole social media sphere, but also in the discussion of first amendment free speech rights.
On April 14, 2022 Elon Musk, the world’s richest man with a net worth of over $191 billion, became Twitter’s largest shareholder with a 9.1% stake in the company, prompting suspicious concerns of tyranny and free speech. Nevertheless, this acquisition effort by Musk took months to come to fruition. Just recently, on October 27, 2022, Musk finalized his deal with Twitter, buying the company outright for $44 billion – a sublime presentation of the power of wealth, a power some condemned and scrutinized.
Twitter, self defined as “the town square of the internet,” has proven to be fundamental in the discussion of free speech in America, a fundamental right as described by the Supreme Court. Although, during and resulting from Covid-19, Twitter enacted a new set of policies that “expand[ed] their definition of harmful content to include content that goes against guidance provided by ‘authoritative sources of global and local public health information’,” policies that some regard as restrictions on free speech.
Moreover, these policies removed tweets that:
- Deny global or local health authority recommendations (e.g. related to social distancing)
- Deny established scientific facts about transmission of the virus and the difference between the virus and other diseases
- Promote unproven or harmful treatments, protection measures, diagnostic criteria, and cures for the virus
- Share claims that intend to manipulate behavior to support a third-party (e.g. the virus is not real, leave your house and support business X)
- Propagate information that creates panic, unrest, and disorder
- Share claims made by an individual who is impersonating a government or health official or organization (e.g. parody accounts)
- Promote the notion that certain nationalities or groups are more or less susceptible to the virus
Nevertheless, the self-proclaimed ‘free speech absolutist’ defines free speech as only “that which matches the law,” comparing the amendment directly to “the will of the people”. Though, a report from Pew Research Center identifies that Twitter’s aggregate user base condemns Musk’s free speech agenda, which recently reinstated the accounts of Donald Trump and Kanye West. Undeniably progressive, nearly the entire user base classifies into four social categories: “more likely to be democrats, younger [than the national average], more highly educated, and have higher incomes U.S adults overall”. This results in progressive stances against ‘orignalist’ interpretations of the constitution, which are most notably related to the emphasis of free speech rights over the prevention of hate speech and disinformation.
Twitter is a private company; therefore, it does not violate first amendment rights, something the government can only do. However, Musk condemned Twitter’s role in censoring information relevant to election outcomes, stating that “acting under orders from the government to suppress free speech, with no judicial review, is [a 1st amendment violation],” which ironically contrasts the Wikileaks case in 2016.
Nonetheless a fundamental concern, this censorship is exactly what happened in the 2020 presidential election, when Hunter Biden had embarrassing and damaging information, tainting his family’s political campaign and social image. An infamous New York Post article released the “smoking gun,” a devastating piece Twitter censored on unwarranted concerns of hacking on the DNC’s request, to which they banned the article’s URL. In April 2019, Hunter Biden’s water damaged macbook pro was dropped off by an unknown figure at a repair store in Delaware, the incumbent’s home state. Obliviously, the store owner found wildly explicit content and incriminating content, which included emails that directly tied Biden to his son’s business ventures in Ukraine.
Earlier in his campaign, Biden deflected suspicions on his role in Hunter Biden’s relationship with Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma, even though multiple sources contradict his claim. Moreover, Biden falsely vindicated himself to reporters, stating that “[he] ha[d] never spoken to [his] son about his overseas business dealings,” while contrarily arguing Trump should be the one investigated because “[he is] on the phone, trying to intimidate a foreign leader”. In March 2016, Biden threatened to withhold $1 Billion from Ukraine’s sitting president unless the prosecutor that was investigating Burisma Holdings was fired. Within months, the prosecutor was fired and Hunter Biden remained on Burisma Holdings’ board until April 2019, right before his father’s presidential campaign.
Twitter has seen the most radical change in its dynamics in the company’s history. Last month, the workforce was effectively cut in half to only about 3700 workers and hundreds more quit; moreover, Elon’s imposing demands of a “hard core” work environment lead to this mass exodus.
The introduction of the infamous $8 a month Twitter blue, a pay-for-verification scheme that has caused a rise in fake accounts and parody tweets, has evoked outrage in some and excitement in others. Government leaders, from AOC to White House Press Secretary Karin Jean-Pierre, have called for the historic platform to reform their policies of hate speech and filtering, while right-wing activists and media praise Elon as a 21st century free speech revivalist. Nevertheless, both sides’ rhetoric condemn either Trump or Biden, generally referring to either one as an exemplar of US failures – seemingly common practice of politicized media today.
In the end, Twitter’s role in modern society can only expand. The only widespread social media app, sought globally for mass-audience instantaneous messaging, moving to a different platform for most governments, companies, and celebrities seems more than unlikely. Despite recent boycotts, advertisers are returning back to Twitter, which merely prompts to ask when and not if social media stars and celebrities will eventually come to terms with the reforms.
