I want to preface this post by emphasizing that, although I respect Elon Musk and his work enormously, I am not a blind cult-follower. I do not spend the majority of my time talking or thinking about him and his next moves; this post is objective.
The Twitter saga currently unfolding has been massively interesting to witness. I spent several hours on Twitter, reading the general reception in regards to the acquisition. This included both notable personalities (verified on Twitter) and general people opining. I’ve consolidated my sample of feedback of those against Elon into a series of three narratives, which I will then dissect.
(1) Billionaires Buying Media Outlets to Control Us
Over the last two years, an increased villainous billionaire narrative has infested almost every conversation about anything. It oddly (or not oddly) seems to be concentrated around Elon Musk. My interpretation is that this is a scapegoating mechanism to deter attention away from the failures of others (governments, etc) while, specifically in-terms of Musk, attempting to stifle his increasing organic influence.
What should be obvious, but evidently is not, is that those who fear billionaires owning the media have already had their worst fears played out long ago. The BBC dissected ownership of major media platforms; the takeaway is self-evident.
What is even more important to recognize is the great distinction between a platform which produces opinion-based content vs. a platform which produces no content.
It is controversial for Elon Musk to buy Twitter; a platform which produces no content, but was not and is not controversial for Jeff Bezos to purchase the Washington Post; a platform which exclusively produces opinion-based content, and therefore has the ability to influence public discourse through centralized structures.
(2) The Wealthy Generally Spending Money
Countless people are tweeting Elon’s obligation to solving world hunger rather than buying Twitter. How the two are related or how it is his responsibility is logic I cannot fully comprehend. The quantity of tweets generally around him doing other things with his money is fascinating to see. I could speculate that this is the byproduct of growing income inequality combined with non-stop reporting on the fluctuating unrealized wealth of five people.
Simultaneously, I believe people aspire to hear a philanthropic narrative from those in power, even if it is potentially disingenuous. Bill Gates having carefully crafted his image to philanthropy/sustainability has rendered him much more palatable than Musk, despite Gates shorting (placing a bet against) Tesla stock, a company whose entire premise is sustainability and green energy.
(3) Free Speech in Peril
In an odd twist, there is a very clear fear that free speech is being threatened, given that now these billionaires have full control over the platforms we derive our information from. It is odd given that Elon has made his intentions clear: open-sourcing Twitter’s algorithms as to create full transparency into what’s happening on the world’s town square (as he has dubbed it). Thus, creating a difficult environment for centralized manipulation and governance over such a powerful tool.
So in fact, those who fear that free speech is in danger are likely confused as to the profound implications of what he is attempting to do.
Conclusion
After parsing through 1000+ tweets, I have not read any coherent or logic-based argument against the Twitter acquisition. This seems to be the result of general confusion: from the basics of how media functions and who owns media, to how information is disseminated on social media platforms and those platforms’ underlying business model. It’s almost as if those who are opining the loudest have done little to no research, but are rather mimicking the rhetoric born from other media platforms.
Elon Musk has grown a large and vocal organic following of generally libertarian Americans with a distrust for governments and traditional institutions/power structures. This implicit power has made him a threat to countless people and organizations, whether justified or not.
The byproduct of what we see now strikes me as being deliberately planted narratives against him to reduce his power and influence. Although I’m speculating, it strikes me as the most likely scenario.