In the days leading up to March 14th, Elon Musk was busy. By day, he was working with his team to address supply chain issues which challenge Tesla’s ability to ramp up production and maintain unit costs. On breaks, he watched with interest as Manchin’s “on again, off again” support of Build Back Better puts at risk EV and solar subsidies which threaten to make consumers think twice about dropping $20,000 more on a car or rooftop panels to save $80 a month.
By night? Elon was quietly amassing shares of Twitter. A LOT of shares. As of now, his ownership stands at 9.2% of the company. To say this is a major development in the world of big tech is an understatement. It also puts this poll, 11 days AFTER taking the ownership position, in perspective.
Not surprisingly, when the world’s richest man with 80 million Twitter followers buys something (like Dogecoin), markets take now and in the case of Twitter, traders sent the stock soaring, up 27%. It’s been a rocky last 15 months and even with the jump today, it’s still more than 10% below the level it was at January 8th, 2021 when Twitter kicked off President Trump, the previous title holder of “World’s most powerful Twitter user.” That the Kremlin, ISIS and Ayatollah Khamenei still have their accounts isn’t unnoticed.
Specifically at issue is the role of Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and Twitter when it comes to the spread of information, misinformation, discussion and who is in charge of discerning them. Alex Berenson was kicked off Twitter for daring to challenge the COVID narrative. He is currently embroiled in a lawsuit with them to determine once and for all in California court “Is Twitter a town square?” Elon Musk seems to think so.
Given that Twitter serves as the de facto public town square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy. What should be done?
I’ve written at length that Big Tech and the Government have been seemingly working hand in hand to quell dissent, craft “the one and only narrative”, and influence public opinion. Some examples are in the article below, and in particular I include a rundown of the Alex Berenson-Twitter legal case in “What Happens Now?”
Section 230 of the Federal Communications act needs to be modified. From an anti trust perspective, a strong argument can be made that these companies are TOO big and powerful, but not surprisingly, Government has no interest in dismantling its most effective narrator.
Welcome Elon to the fold, with the wealth to buy Twitter 6 times over, he is a force that the Government can’t match and Big Tech will struggle to compete with. I have previously written that media is changing from a network driven narrative to an user selected content model. A censorship free Twitter massively accelerates that move and with Elon clear on the side of the 1st amendment, anything is possible. He is a pragmatist, acknowledges the truth regardless of his personal benefit, and has no interest in pandering to Government.
What’s not to love?
while i agree with you that elon has no interest in pandering to the govt, he is not truthful. a prime example is he has claimed to have full self driving for years, charged customers for it, but yet there is no full self driving. there are many examples of further outright lies. while i hope he pushes twitter to remove censorship.