You can consider this text a follow-up to Nilay Patel article published on Verge on 28.10.2022 because Nilay nailed it. Honestly, it is hard for me to find any noble reason for acquiring Twitter from one influential individual than buying himself even more influence. Twitter is not a technological asset (as Nilay highlighted). The value in the Twitter case lies in the brand. The brand is powered by a vast user base mostly addicted to the network and thus attention.
Elon Musk may be a visionary entrepreneur, but as far as we know, he is far from being a God or “at least” a Jesus Christ. We really don’t know much about his moral compass or his personal values; basically, nobody except Elon Musk knows what he thinks. That said, Elon Musk is a really visible and publicly exposed influential person that now possesses a network, a channel capable of reaching and influencing hundreds of millions of people around the globe.
Too much power can kill you
Again, as far as we know, Elon is a human being. Human beings are famous for doing a lot of overstepping and making tons of errors throughout their lives. This is why democracies are still the best invention for the governance of human society. Where there is open discussion, robust control mechanisms in place, and constant search for abuse of power from independent institutions, there is a certainty that things will work for the good of the whole, not a few.
Take a look at China or Russia. One compelling individual decided to act against the will of the whole independent country, and the other is now circling the other. They are driven by their gigantic egos, and both effectively lost the ability to instantly re-think and re-evaluate their opinions and decisions. They don’t want to listen; they can’t hear; they are trapped inside their mental constructs. And guess what? Elon is in a similar position now. Same as Mark.
Mark Zuckerberg has already learned a lesson about how evil and bad people can be but still possess a massive influence over the dangerous algorithms that drive people into the arms of radicals. Elon is about to find out soon.
The more networks the better
What is the solution? It is hard to find one. This is a complex topic. But we in Conectin media believe that diluting the power and influence could help. We believe that if the world has thousands of social networks instead of just a few, and those would be managed by thousands of smart people and companies (thus moderators), the whole system would be less vulnerable. The resilience against one man or woman’s mistake would grow exponentially.
It works the same way in the free media world. There are thousands of publishers and millions of bloggers. Yes, there are crazy guys out there too. Some news outlets and magazines spread blatant lies, but the whole system is much stronger than the social media world. You can publish total bullshit on your blog, but Facebook or Twitter are the places that give that bullshit a viral push. If the audience is diluted across thousands of new networks with independent owners and managers, it would be much harder to get that push.
Not to mention that social media platforms with non-manipulative algos, cannot get any posts the rocket start they see now on Facebook. We don’t want to claim that we can solve all social media problems and cure a divided society instantly. But we believe we can help a bit. And on top of that, bring to people dedicated social networks free of neverending streams of ads, political bickering, swearing and insulting.
Libor Zezulka, co-founder of Conectin media
