American entrepreneur Elon Musk called the social network Twitter “a digital town square where things vital to humanity are discussed.” On this platform, you can say and hear whatever you want. So Musk is well aware of how important a communication tool this platform has become in our time.
Instrumentalization in favor of Musk?
This raises questions: Does Musk realize the full scale of the responsibility that his purchase of Twitter entails? Does he understand that it is not only about profit, as in any private company? Is he going to buy Twitter as a successful businessman to use this platform for his own benefit?
Carolina Chimoy
He had some ideas about this in a number of interviews and on stage at the last TED Talks in early April: according to Musk, Twitter should build its work on the principles of private business. In its current form, the social network, in his opinion, does not serve freedom of speech – a public imperative in a functioning democracy, but messages on this platform are unnecessarily moderated every now and then. But what does “free speech” mean for Musk? Does this mean that anyone can claim what they want – even if the claims are completely untrue?
Musk has stressed several times that he sees no point in denying people access to the platform. Among the most famous personalities whose account has been blocked on Twitter is former US President Donald Trump. He was banned after his supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Twitter subsequently commented as follows: “After carefully reviewing @realDonaldTrump’s latest tweets and the context around them – in particular how they were received and interpreted on Twitter and outside the platform – we have permanently banned the account due to the risk of further incitement to violence.”
Musk, “free speech absolutist”
But Musk doesn’t need rules. In one of the interviews, he made it clear that under his leadership, Twitter will not be able to block accounts. The world’s richest man, worth about $270 billion, wants to make Twitter the “social imperative” of free speech. Everyone should be able to speak up on any issue, says Musk, who calls himself a “free speech absolutist.”
A world that is hard to imagine, especially under Musk: the billionaire is known for repeatedly blocking those who criticize him or the companies he owns on his own Twitter account. Journalists who criticize him are also regularly attacked on Musk’s Twitter page.
No market belongs to just one person
Perhaps Musk is right when he calls Twitter the digital city square of the 21st century. But there are still some important differences: communication in city squares has never been limited to 280 characters. Personal communication provides much more information than a short text message, accompanied by a maximum of a picture.
And finally, the most important difference: the city square never belongs to one person and is not so susceptible to disinformation. A trend that, in the absence of rules, will lead to even greater polarization (of public consciousness. – Red.).
Posted by Carolina Chimoy, DW Washington Correspondent
The comment expresses the personal opinion of the author. It may not coincide with the opinion of the Russian editorial board and Deutsche Welle generally.
See also:
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
We don’t fly, but we chat!
Science fiction writers dreamed that in the 21st century we would fly around the Galaxy, but in fact one of the “everyday” achievements of the new era is the ability to contact anyone anywhere at any time. For this, wise humanity has come up with instant messengers. And there were a huge number of them. Some we know, some we don’t. Let’s look at them together!
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
WhatsApp: hegemon and giant
One of the most popular instant messengers in the world is WhatsApp (its name is probably a pun on the English “What’s up?” – “What is it?”). The company that created the messenger was founded in 2009. WhatsApp has made tremendous progress over the years – its total audience worldwide exceeds one billion users. In 2014, WhatsApp was acquired by another giant – Facebook.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
WeChat: Chinese furore
In terms of audience coverage, WeChat is also one of the most popular instant messengers, but most of its users are in China. Among the interesting features of this service is the ability to communicate with a randomly selected interlocutor (ideal for dating or just chatting about nothing). WeChat is also a successful and convenient payment system. True, only for the Chinese.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Snapchat: US youth are delighted
An absolute sensation in the USA is the Snapchat application that allows you to share photos, videos, add text and drawings. One of the interesting features of the messenger is that all content is available for a limited amount of time, after which all photos, videos and other valuables disappear forever. Young people use it especially eagerly.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Telegram: freedom of speech and more
Pavel Durov’s messenger has recently made headlines in the media very often. Nevertheless, Telegram (founded in 2013) is not only an outpost of freedom of speech (at least according to its owners) – it is also convenient in a number of ways. There you can run your own channels, create huge groups (up to 10 thousand people), upload copyright stickers, there is a convenient web version and a lot of useful bots.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Allo: robots threaten communication!
Messenger from Google with a built-in automatic assistant – you can search for information without leaving the conversation. And there is also a “smart answer” function – firstly, Allo offers options for answering the last message of the interlocutor, and secondly, the messenger (allegedly!) Analyzes your messages in order to offer more appropriate answers in the future. Soon we will communicate only with the help of robots.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Viber: popular but ordinary
A very popular messenger in Russia, however, Viber does not have any unique features – except for the implemented money transfer system through one of the world’s largest operators.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Threema: an alternative for 3 euros
Swiss-based Threema is considered by many as an alternative to WhatsApp – primarily as a service that deals with the security of correspondence. For example, you can scan the code on a friend’s phone – and then he will be assigned the highest verification level. Threema is a popular messenger, but its “not free” hinders real growth – German residents must pay 3 euros for it.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Line: a legend from Japan
Basically, it’s a fairly common messenger that deserves attention as the most popular instant messaging service in Japan. The legend about the creation of Line is interesting: they say that one of the reasons was the accident at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant. Many who were in the disaster area could not be contacted due to interruptions in communication, although the Internet worked. This allegedly inspired the creators of Line.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Signal: Snowden may recommend
Another little-known messenger that Edward Snowden allegedly uses (or used before). The creators of Signal swear that the security of correspondence is maximum. Signal’s features include the ability to set up auto-delete of old messages and a ban on screenshots. And this messenger has an open code, that is, any specialist can make sure that the correspondence is protected.
-
Messengers: not only WhatsApp
Facebook and others
There are, of course, messengers Facebook, Skype, an application from the Russian social network vk.com, but they are probably well known to you even without our review. What communication services do you use?
Author: Grigory Arosev
