Twitter’s Implosion and What it Means for the Fight Against Misinformation

By Ana Blanco

The spread of misinformation over social media is a problem that is growing in scope and scale.  To make matters worse, the outlook for addressing social media’s toxicity as an enabler for misinformation has weakened with Elon Musk’s recent takeover of Twitter. 

Upon finalizing one of the largest tech acquisitions in history for $44 billion, the world’s richest man  proceeded to fire Twitter’s executive team, lay off 50% of the staff (including key personnel for content moderation), and indicated without substantiation that the New York Times is “fake news”. These decisions were followed by the launch of a paid verification model and the subsequent suspension of  the very same paid verification due to user abuse. Attempting to appease nervous advertisers, Musk posted a “Dear Twitter Advertisers” letter explaining his vision for Twitter and the role advertisers should play. The letter was followed a few days later by a threat of “thermonuclear name & shame” for companies that pause their advertising on Twitter. The staff remaining after the layoffs received an ultimatum to commit to an “extremely hardcore” Twitter or else take severance. Resignations were in the high hundreds. Meanwhile, the volume of hateful tweets spiked significantly.  All this chaos has taken place over the span of two weeks. 

Let that sink in.

This Twitter acquisition marks an inflection point in the evolution of social media and the spread of fake news, hate speech, misinformation and disinformation. As a private company Twitter is now subject to less stringent transparency and accountability rules. Mechanisms like shareholder oversight, regular audits, and scrutiny of financial statements no longer apply. The private company structure, coupled with the modifications to the platform’s operating model, creates a formula for enabling malign actors and unwitting accomplices to disseminate content with no basis in fact or reality with real harm potential. This situation has made stopping the spread of misinformation much harder.

The need for active multi-stakeholder action to combat misinformation and protect the public from its harmful effects is more important than ever. 

An authoritative report by CollaborateUp analyzes the trends behind the rise of misinformation, its poignant effects on the very fabric of our society, and identifies steps to counter it. It highlights case studies of private ownership of mass media companies in a few countries and concludes that wealthy individuals such as Mr. Musk can exacerbate misinformation when they use their media platforms to amplify private interests, and perpetuate a lack of transparency, weak regulation, and information illiteracy. 

According to CollaborateUp’s report, only one in four social media users have healthy information habits such as verifying information and avoiding information echo chambers. It also highlights that misinformation is 70% more likely to be shared than truthful information. This dramatically increases people’s vulnerability to biased or untruthful information vastly disseminated through privately owned and laxly regulated platforms. 

Unfortunately, our regulatory and policy frameworks are largely unable to react efficiently to the threats posed by these fast-moving, ever-changing digital tools. And the platforms themselves remain too cautious when moderating content, in large part out of a respect for freedom of expression. 

When analyzing free speech, the report by CollaborateUp invokes the US Supreme Court’s position that reasonable limits to free speech are necessary to uphold the public interest. The influence of digital platforms in our society warrants an update in our common understanding of how we regulate, not free expression per se, but its distribution. People’s inalienable right to freely expressing their opinions is undoubtedly one of the greatest achievements of humanity. However, the unfettered access, speed and scale enabled by digital platforms can lead to the infringement of other rights. Put simply, you are entitled to your opinion but not necessarily to its free distribution when it can harm others. One of the most salient examples of this is the student who was mis-identified as a Boston Marathon bomber suspect. 

Regulators and media owners like Mr. Musk should create greater transparency on how social media platforms distribute and serve up content, like that proposed under the EU Digital Services Act, so that users and societies can better understand how information and misinformation spread. 

The fight against misinformation requires a multi-stakeholder approach where governments, mass media enterprises and the public must play an active role. Smart regulatory approaches are needed to protect the public from biased private interests, ill-intentioned actors, and unwitting accomplices. As social media platforms continue to grow their user bases and influence, their responsibility to counter the spread of misinformation also grows. And information literacy must increase among the general public.  

In the absence of widespread smart and efficient regulation, and with platforms like Twitter fumbling their responsibility, we as users have the duty to remain vigilant in identifying toxic content and acting to stop its spread and harm. Are we, individual users, best equipped to take this on?