Announcing his £35bn ($44bn) acquisition of Twitter this week, Elon Musk made a typically sweeping claim: “Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated.” The self-described “free speech absolutist” now owns a platform where those views will probably shape the experience of its 400 million users and possibly wider society. His position deserves serious examination.

Put into practice, the website might find itself going back to the future. A decade ago, Twitter executives described it as “the free speech wing of the free speech party”. That was an era in which protesters in the Arab spring tweeted against their authoritarian rulers and when wannabes gained notoriety for directing vile racist and sexist abuse against others often more famous. From MPs to female actors in Ghostbusters, the hate brigaders had many targets and met pitifully few obstructions.

Elon Musk claims to be a ‘free speech absolutist’. As the platform’s new boss, he may find that principle hard to enact

It took until December 2017 for the platform to boot off the American Nazi party and other white supremacists, months after the lethal Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Painfully slowly, the platform had finally learned that its policy of letting people say pretty much whatever they liked created an environment that millions didn’t like. It dismayed users and repelled advertisers.

The very views that have helped make Mr Musk such a popular user of Twitter (86 million followers and rising) will be useless to him as its owner. Take one of the billionaire’s tweets from this week, which reads in part: “By ‘free speech’, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law.” Sounds reasonable, but in practice it is unworkable.

In the US, for instance, it most likely means opening the door to look-at-me provocateurs and the far right. It means Make Twitter Toxic Again. But in Saudi Arabia and China, on the other hand, following the letter of the free-speech laws will turn the platform into a barren wasteland. In both cases, pointing to the first amendment gets you nowhere.

This isn’t rocket science – which is a shame because Mr Musk is a rocket scientist. At SpaceX and Tesla, he has proven himself a brilliant engineer. But his views on ethics and politics are clearly work in progress. Put alongside the much larger Facebook, Twitter cannot match its armies of moderators and advisers and independent experts. And yet both platforms are running into ever more significant regulatory headwinds. Westminster is introducing what the government describes as the world’s first online safety laws. Not far behind is Brussels, where the European Commission has launched a declaration on digital rights that calls for technology firms to “respect people’s rights, enable their exercise and promote inclusion”.

Those last two words are crucial. For all that social media firms boast of providing a public good, they have hardly thought about debate in terms that go beyond banning the most obnoxious participants. They are often little more than competitions of who shouts loudest for longest. If these huge ethical, political and social issues are left to a tiny bunch of American billionaire media owners and their well-paid advisers to arbitrate, social media will always fail to live up to the promise of being a global digital commons. When Donald Trump was hoicked off Twitter and Facebook, Mr Musk tweeted: “A lot of people are going to be super unhappy with West Coast high tech as the de facto arbiter of free speech.” Fair point then, fair point now.

World Opinions by The Guardian view

L’article View on Twitter: when free speech costs a bomb est apparu en premier sur World Opinion | Alternative Média.

The board of Twitter has agreed to a $44bn (£34.5bn) takeover offer from the billionaire Elon Musk.

🚀💫♥️ Yesss!!! ♥️💫🚀 pic.twitter.com/0T9HzUHuh6

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 25, 2022

Mr Musk, who made the shock bid less than two weeks ago, said Twitter had « tremendous potential » that he would unlock.

I hope that even my worst critics remain on Twitter, because that is what free speech means

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 25, 2022

He also called for a series of changes from relaxing its content restrictions to eradicating fake accounts.

The firm initially rebuffed Mr Musk’s bid, but it will now ask shareholders to vote to approve the deal.

Mr Musk is the world’s richest person, according to Forbes magazine, with an estimated net worth of $273.6bn mostly due to his shareholding in electric vehicle maker Tesla which he runs. He also leads the aerospace firm SpaceX.

« Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated, » Mr Musk said in a statement announcing the deal.

« I also want to make Twitter better than ever by enhancing the product with new features, making the algorithms open source to increase trust, defeating the spam bots, and authenticating all humans, » he added.

« Twitter has tremendous potential – I look forward to working with the company and the community of users to unlock it. »

The move by Mr Musk comes as Twitter has struggled to stop the spread of misinformation on its platform. In one of its most high-profile moves, last year, it banned former US President Donald Trump, perhaps its most powerful user, citing the risk of « incitement of violence ».

While the takeover has been cheered by his followers, Mr Trump on Monday told Fox News he had no plans to re-join the platform and would instead stay on his own social network, Truth Social.

Mr Musk, who has more than 80 million followers on Twitter, has a controversial history on the platform himself.

In 2018, he clashed with the US financial markets regulator over his use of the platform to share sensitive information about his car company Tesla, resulting in him being banned from doing so and paying a $40m settlement.

And in 2019 he sparked a row after calling a diver « pedo guy » on the platform.

Vernon Unsworth, who had been involved in rescuing 12 Thai schoolboys trapped in cave, sought $190m in damages but eventually lost his defamation case to Mr Musk.

Mr Musk’s decision to take over the company comes as it faces growing pressure from politicians and regulators over the content that appears on its platform.

The White House declined to comment on the takeover but spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters: « The president has long talked about his concerns about the power of social media platforms, including Twitter and others, to spread misinformation. »

On Twitter, MP Julian Knight, chair of the UK’s Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, called the deal an « extraordinary development in the world of social media ».

« It will be interesting to see how a privately owned Twitter (run by a man who is an absolutist over free speech) will react to global moves to regulate. »

Can Musk turn Twitter around?

Mr Musk has said he doesn’t « care about the economics » of the purchase, however he will face pressure to improve the platform’s financial performance.

Despite its influence, Twitter has rarely turned a profit and user growth, particularly in the US, has slowed.

The company ended 2021 with $5bn in revenue and 217 million daily users globally – a fraction of the figures claimed by other platforms such as Facebook.

However Bret Taylor, chair of Twitter’s board, said it had fully assessed Mr Musk’s offer and it was « the best path forward for Twitter’s stockholders ».

Mr Musk has secured $25.5bn of financing for the deal and will take a $21bn stake in the business.

As part of the takeover, which is expected to close later this year, Twitter’s shares will be delisted and it will be taken private. Mr Musk has suggested this will give him freedom to make the changes he wants to the business.

It is not clear who will lead the new company. Twitter is currently led by Parag Agrawal, who took over from co-founder and former boss Jack Dorsey last November.

But in his offer document, Mr Musk told Twitter’s board: « I don’t have confidence in management. »

Mr Musk’s targeting of Twitter has moved at remarkable speed. It emerged at the beginning of April that Mr Musk had become the largest shareholder in the firm with a 9.2% stake.

He was then invited to join Twitter’s board but turned down the offer before launching a surprise bid for the company on 14 April, saying he wanted to « unlock » its potential as a bastion of freedom of speech.

Twitter responded by putting in place a so-called « poison pill » defence to fend off Mr Musk. The mechanism would have created difficulties for Mr Musk if he attempted to increase his stake in the company.

But Twitter’s stance shifted after Mr Musk revealed more financial details about his proposed bid.

World Opinions – Agencies

L’article Elon Musk strikes deal to buy Twitter for $44bn est apparu en premier sur World Opinion | Alternative Média.

The Bureau of Meteorology, state health departments, the Western Australian opposition leader, charities and Facebook itself are among those to have been hit by Facebook’s ban on news in Australia.

Facebook's news ban hammer having a lot of collateral damage. pic.twitter.com/mP4pfd3nL5

— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) February 17, 2021

On Thursday morning Facebook began preventing Australian news sites from posting, while also stopping Australian users from sharing or viewing content from any news outlets, both Australian and international.

The social media giant said it made the decision in response to the news media bargaining code currently before the Senate, which would force Facebook and Google to negotiate with news companies for payment for content.

While the ban was only meant to target Australian news publishers, dozens of pages run by key government agencies, community pages, union pages, charity organisations and politicians were also blocked for several hours.

Australia’s main source of weather information, the Bureau of Meteorology, said on Thursday morning that it had been blocked, and was advising users to go to its direct website, app or Twitter page.

Facebook's news ban hammer having a lot of collateral damage. pic.twitter.com/mP4pfd3nL5

— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) February 17, 2021

As Australia prepares to begin the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines, state health departments, including SA Health and Queensland Health, were unable to post.$

1800 Respect is gone now too.

That's Australia's main domestic violence phone service. https://t.co/vbMUN6YAFJ pic.twitter.com/HKEl7ySpnJ

— VCOSS (@VCOSS) February 17, 2021

So @Facebook has blocked access to our website. We are not a news organisation. Australian workers can not now find out about their rights at work via @Facebook. This is disgraceful & needs to be reversed immediately pic.twitter.com/588Qf1JbuD

— Sally McManus (@sallymcmanus) February 17, 2021

Facebook's news ban hammer having a lot of collateral damage. pic.twitter.com/mP4pfd3nL5

— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) February 17, 2021

By Josh Taylor – theguardian.com

L’article Facebook’s botched Australia news ban hits health departments, charities and its own pages est apparu en premier sur World Opinion | Alternative Média.