Elon Musk wants to create a social network that respects freedom of expression. It’s hard not to see this as the final act of deification by a man who believes he’s found the holy grail of space travel. The last gesture of an eccentric and selfish millionaire who believes himself to be the savior of the people.
My obvious animosity toward the character aside, his promise to create an open-source, cryptocurrency-enabled platform that adheres to the principle that “freedom of speech is essential to effective democracy” basically doesn’t hold up. because she has a wrong idea of freedom of speech.
But it seems Musk doesn’t really care that they can find one more excuse to compare him to Donald Trump, who last October announced the creation of TRUTH Social, his own social network with which to “confront the tyranny of giants”. technologies”.
And so far we have arrived: Elon Musk using his freedom of expression on Twitter to criticize that Twitter does not respect freedom of expression and that is why he is going to create a social network similar to Twitter but that freedom of expression will be respected there. Phew!
What would Elon Musk’s social network look like?
Let’s start at the beginning. On March 24, the CEO of Tesla took to Twitter to express your concern by the nature of the algorithm of this social network, whose “obvious bias” has a “significant effect on public discourse”.
This led him, less than 20 minutes later, to post a first survey with which he wanted to know how many of his followers agreed with the following statement: “Twitter’s algorithm should be open source”. This gave us the first hint of what this possible new social network would be. Result: 82.7% of voters agreed.
Then came the second poll, and a warning.
The consequences of this vote will be important. Please vote carefully.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk)
March 25, 2022
“Free speech is essential in an effective democracy,” Musk assured before asking his followers if they thought “Twitter strictly adheres to this principle”. Participating tweeters once again made it clear: no.
A negative response was all Musk needed to carry out the consequences he warned of when the second poll was released. But as if his megalomaniacal nature and inveterate businessman weren’t enough, he had the courtesy to ask the Twitter community first.
Is a new platform needed?
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk)
March 26, 2022
The South African tycoon had previously hinted that this imaginary social network should have a free code and uphold the principles of free speech, but that was the exchange with another tweeter the one who ended up confirming it.
“Would you consider creating a new social network, @elonmusk? One that uses an open source algorithm, where free speech and respect for free speech is a priority, where propaganda is minimal,” they asked.
“I’m seriously considering it,” he replied.
And with that, it has also been confirmed that Elon Musk’s social network might really be on the way.
Musk also responded with the “100” emoticon to the suggestion from another tweeter that the new platform should include the ability to tip using Dogecoin, and later liked a publication who requested user verification.
But what does Elon Musk mean by freedom of expression?
As we said, the idea of creating a social network that respects freedom of expression was born after Musk denounced the effect that Twitter’s algorithm has on public opinion. So far, we could agree, since the role that social networks have had, for example, in the results of past elections or the dissemination of conspiracy theories and fake news.
At another conversationthe SpaceX founder impersonated Voltaire and paraphrased his famous quote (though there are some who say he never said it) assuring a tweeter that “I disagree with you, but I am even less in agreement with eliminating [lo que publiques]”. Here is his supposed definition of free speech.
And I say supposed because it’s full of nuances. His conception of freedom of expression is dangerously too close to those who invoke it when they want to insult, harass, humiliate someone, thus violating their right to honor and privacy.
It will suit him, for example, when his army of followers hurl insults and taunt anyone who dares to question his idol. And, more so, of course, when he himself reinterprets the First Amendment to supposedly silence the investor nicknamed Montana Skpetic, who deactivated his Twitter account and stopped writing about Tesla after Musk threatened him with pursue it.
Thus, he seems to modify this definition when it suits him. It must not have seemed like proper freedom of speech when then-Tesla employee John Bernal posted a video on YouTube criticizing the company’s Full Self Driving Beta system.
Seems @Elon Musk is a free speech absolutist…unless it involves security concerns IMO 🤷🏼♂️ https://t.co/QWV5JFukOc
— Aiaddict (@Aiaddict1)
March 25, 2022
Bernal was fired.
Saying what you think at all times without understanding that sometimes it’s limited by other rights and even common sense has been more of a problem for Musk.
In April 2019, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) succeeded in limiting Musk’s use of Twitter when disclosing information about Tesla, after it was published that he was considering taking the company private. triggering chaos and hurting investors.
But of course, unlimited freedom of expression goes ahead.
assured failure
But what leads me to write this article is that the social network it proposes seems infeasible.
First of all, and from a purely commercial point of view, it will be difficult to succeed in reinventing something that already exists and has more than 200 million users. Yes, we are talking about Twitter. There is no real demand for the platform Musk wants to create and it is doomed.
Take the example of Parler, which also wanted to establish itself as the social network that welcomed those censored by Twitter and Facebook but which, inevitably, had to moderate the content to avoid blackmail, support for terrorism or the promotion of marijuana.
And that’s precisely what I think will happen if Elon Musk’s social network is finally revealed. You will need to create terms and conditions of use that are not likely to violate the Federal Commission of Commissions or the Supreme Court of the United States. But, I wonder, wouldn’t the freedom of expression of its users be limited in this way?
Additionally, I also see many weak points in the verification process to use the version of Twitter that Musk is going to create. It’s too early to know what it will consist of, but the question is on the table: should social network users use an ID to verify themselves and thus avoid the creation of bots?
I understand the arguments of those who say yes and also the concern about the growing presence of accounts that only spread hate. Although that would be another discussion, I am concerned about minorities who use a pseudonym on the Internet as a form of protection and that the space where they can use their freedom of expression is reduced.
And I am a strong defender of freedom of expression. But not Elon Musk’s, but the one who uses it with respect and to defend themselves against injustice. Voices that rise peacefully, against oppression and without invading the rights of others.
