When Elon Musk initially took over daily operations at Twitter he said the world would know he's doing the right thing if both sides of the political aisle were ticked off. Well, people are upset, but not because the billionaire technocrat is doing a good job. On Sunday evening, Musk put out a Twitter poll asking if he should remain at Twitter's helm. The votes are in, and 57.5% of respondants think he should step down.
If this sounds like an odd way to set the course of what is arguably the internet's "town square" it's at least consistent with Musk's erratic and seemingly self-destructive management style since overbidding for the microblogging platform. Last week alone, Twitter suspended multiple journalists' accounts, moved to block off-site linking to competitor social media platforms and set a policy banning discussions of publicly-available flight data. All of this, of course, belies Musk's stated commitment to free speech.
The self-contractictions are funny in the Shakespearean tragicomic sense. Brutus turned tyrannical after trying to prevent Rome from slipping into a dictatorship. Musk banned a fan of his that tracked his private jet after specifically saying he'd protect for the sake of a higher principle.
For perhaps all but Musk's peers this disastrous leadership has come as no surprise. Y-Combinator founder Paul Graham, who had supported Musk's takeover, called his latest tantrum "the last straw" and linked to his Mastodon profile. His account was briefly suspended.
Still, the situation could be worse. Especially for crypto, the source of many of Twitter's woes, Musks erratic example has only proved the importance of democratically-managed and open source platforms. As Ethereum co-creator Vitalik Buterin put it, Twitter under Musk is on the path to "authoritarianism." It's worth noting that Musk has dissolved the company's board, pushed out many of its executives and paid non-alligned employees to leave.
Putting aside overzealous obituaries to Twitter, the possible collapse of the platform only helps reaffirm the belief that alternatives should exist. Social media, a relatively new phenomenon in the scheme of things, has been captured by mindvirus that monopolies are good. It's true that network effects matter – having an overabundance of friends and foes on a website makes things fun. But the idea that software has to be captured by financial interests, that even publicly-traded firms should be controlled by supermajority stockholders is insane.
No one knows if it's lights out for Twitter. The "vibes are off" and users and advertisers are leaving in droves. Musk himself claims the company is heading to bankruptcy. Things could also miraculously turn around, or the site could drag on for decades like debt-ladden, private-equity owned radio conglomerates. But the damage is done. Egoism is out, communities are in. Centralism is flawed, public goods are great. What Web3 makes of the moment is up to YOU, dear reader.
– D.K.
