There are many complaints of anxiety from representatives of the “left” (not the right left – that would be us libertarians) who are accustomed to an echo chamber that “protects” them from EVIL PEOPLE and their heterodox political views.
Perhaps the craziest view of the opportunity came from the former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reichwho, in The Guardian, estimates that Musk ‘s “libertarian vision” of the uncontrolled “Internet” is “the dream of every country’ s dictator, powerhouse, demagogue, and modern – day robber.”
You know, dictators, powerlords, etc., who shut down social media that doesn’t censor them, and sometimes even try to shut down the Internet altogether if the peasants revolt.
The Twitter government was busy approving a “poison pill” to thwart Musk’s power. Meanwhile, Musk says it has received $ 46.5 billion in funding to make it happen.
My question is not whether Musk should “allow” to buy Twitter (he should, if its shareholders are willing to sell). Therefore, he would want to pay that kind of money out of an old and broken platform that is likely to have unresolved issues when he could build something better and probably more successful at a fraction of the cost.
Twitter is in many ways an ideal platform to see just what you want to see. You can block users whose posts you don’t want to read. You can screen who is allowed to follow you. If you really hate a certain perspective, you can easily build a “silo” for yourself that mostly hides that perspective from yourself.
Given these facts, Twitter’s content moderation policy SHOULD be “grow up, use a cup, and learn to use the block button instead of yelling at us”.
Instead, the company has developed a policy – and worse, a rooted culture – for micro-management of user content, apparently based on the slogan “For God’s love, doesn’t anyone PLEASE think of Karen?”
If Musk buys Twitter, he will inherit not only this policy, but a workforce that has shown willing, even eager, to abide by it. How many will stop or have to lay off to revive the platform after years of declining user numbers?
Instead of spending $ 46 billion on Twitter, Muskin would have to spend $ 4.6 billion: a billion dollars on original infrastructure, a billion dollars to hire a workforce that does things its own way, a billion dollars in promotions, and a $ 1.6 billion bonus for me on this proposal. .
He would likely get 10 million users on the first day and an average of one million users in the first year. Especially if SpaceX launches and Tesla events stream exclusively in Muskrat (this name suggestion should raise my bonus up to $ 2 billion).
And it would be better for all of us (except Twitter) to have more competition in the social media market.
Factor: Thomas L. Knapp
| (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is a director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in northern Central Florida. |
This is the opinion view “View”. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of The Helsinki Times. This column has not been revised and HT is not responsible for any inaccurate or misleading statements in this article.
 | (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is a director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in northern Central Florida. |
This is the “View” column. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of The Helsinki Times. This column has not been revised and HT is not responsible for any inaccurate or misleading statements in this article.
Source: The Nordic Page