Intellectual Consistency

The events after the stock market closed Friday were significant.  I point out the timing because Twitter, Google, CNN, Fox, Parler and... well, virtually every business except Tesla are a for-profit business (I kid, I kid... more on that in #technicaltuesday this week)

In case you missed it, Twitter permanently suspended the President’s personal account and then deleted tweets from the @POTUS account (here’s a fun look back on the influence of Twitter by Trump, in what arguably was the tool that brought him to power in the first place).

The arguments I have seen in support of the Twitter ban go something like this: “they are a private company and they can do what they like.  It is a privilege they provide to give people a platform. You don’t pay for their service, and they monetize you through ads. Full stop. They can do what they like.”

Having had my issues with an unnamed social media platform in the past, and therefore having thought about this a lot, I think the counter argument is revolves around that thorny “section 230”. Under the protections of section 230, one argues that they are more like a utility than a media company, shielded from Liability of what is on their platform, and the implication is that they should be limited in the ability to censor content and remove it, and their authors (as they have done with Alex Jones previously, and now, Donald Trump).

Let’s talk about Twitter, the business.
As a business, there are 186 million Twitter active users who post 500 million tweets a day, which generates $936 mm in Q3 revenue, primarily from advertising (which is roughly 2 cents a Tweet) and generated $214 mm of operating cash flow (implying roughly 50x market cap/operating cash flow...).  Their board made a decision that banning Trump will have a positive net profit impact and will outweigh the potential backlash it faces (as an aside, in the same day, Google removed Twitter’s competitor, Parler, from it’s App Store citing the lack of removal of content it deemed dangerous).  In both cases, no criminal charges have been made based on the content, no jury of peers has been convened, and no convictions have occurred... nonetheless guilty... because we say so.

So, what’s the problem?  We just finished a year when private companies were told they CAN’T do what they like.  Well, at least the small ones were.  Amazon, Home Depot, Apple, Google, Twitter and Facebook, they could do what they liked, and their market cap increases in 2020 reflect that.  Many others, primarily non-public, the ones without lobbyists, the ones that you and I start and run, they were told that they must operate in a certain way and in many cases, the restrictions placed on them have weakened or destroyed the business.

The irony is that those “generally” making the argument that Twitter is a private company and can do what they like, were also the ones making the argument for restrictions during COVID.  I believe that you can’t have it both ways when the argument is convenient.  I am totally against restrictions on businesses and with 230 protection, I don’t believe social media companies should pick and choose their winners and losers.

So what to do about it?  I will likely delete my Twitter account and take away the 2 cents a tweet they generate off my eyeballs.  And, I 100% acknowledge my duplicity in this regard by keeping LI, despite their historic transgressions against accounts they didn’t agree with. But let’s be honest, I’m not the President of the United States and selfishly, I personally enjoy and benefit from interactions on LI and so my personal utility exceeds my frustration, for now.  That’s the best part about our country: we can make a choice and vote with our wallets.  Each person will make up their own mind.

My hope is that the duplicity that is allowing a large, private company to exercise it’s right to do what it thinks is best, is mirrored by the millions of small businesses that know what is best for their business. Private businesses should open and let consumers choose or government should shut down, chop incomes to match restrictions, and live by the choices THEY make.

After all, what is good for the goose, is good for the gander.