This illustrative photo taken on Aug. 5, 2022, shows a mobile phone showing a photo of Elon Musk placed on a computer screen full of Twitter in Washington, D. C. (Samuel Corum/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)
As Congress reconsiders the idea of banning TikTok for security reasons and potential influence in the 2024 election, we aim to broaden our focus to address the similar dynamic of X, formerly Twitter, under Elon Musk’s ownership.
Even if a forced sale of X, given its ownership in the U. S. In the U. S. , it’s not an option, ignoring the platform’s threats just because of this difference is a serious oversight. I’m a political influencer on X and TikTok, and it’s transparent to me that if Americans lose to TikTok, X’s role in the virtual discourse landscape will only expand.
Musk’s tenure at X was marked by the promotion of far-right ideologies, the monetization of misinformation, and censorship. Not only has Musk promoted white supremacy-related figures and platforms aligned with Donald Trump, but he has also banned journalists and pursued policies that suppress dissenting voices.
Critics of TikTok’s proposed “ban” (in reality, the bill passed by the U. S. House of Representatives would require a forced sale of the Chinese app) have praised the transparency of X’s ruleset as a solution to considerations about manipulation of the platform. Business mogul Mark Cuban, for example, who tweeted: “My take on #tiktokban: Any social media platform that allows users under the age of 18 will have to publicly post its set of rules. A lot of other people will post how the rules work. “so parents can be smarter about what their kids see. . . Just as @X/@elonmusk is doing right now.
However, as Musk has made clear, simply publishing a social media platform’s set of rules does not correct its biases. For example, Musk demanded that the X ruleset excessively amplify his own posts. Since Elon Musk’s news is necessarily a cesspool of far-right conspiracy theories and misinformation about the national immigration crisis, introducing this content into the user’s feed is necessarily a large in-kind donation to Trump’s reelection campaign. Algorithm aside, X has also created a financial incentive for viral misinformation through its new policy of compensating “verified” users for their participation.
Of course, Musk has gutted Twitter’s original verification system, and is now content to sell the prominent blue badges to those willing to pay. While some claim that the platform’s “Community Notes” system, which helps verify facts and contextualize misleading messages, solves some of those problems, on the other hand, Musk has used this tool as a weapon on behalf of far-right extremists. Musk, who has more than 170 million fans on the site, has removed Community Note’s fact checks from his own posts.
Beyond Musk’s manual manipulation of his platform, he has also engaged in blatantly hypocritical censorship, despite insistence that he is a “free speech absolutist. “X has been involved in content-selective agreements that announce one-sided views. Tucker Carlson, a white nationalist and former Fox News host, hosts an exhibit on the platform. In January, Linda Yaccarino, executive director of X, presented a number of other presentations that would be released, adding to those presented through Tulsi Gabbard and Don Lemon. Even more alarming, Musk has to ban journalists and celebrity users who criticize him.
TikTok has an important virtual area for many creators and consumers of political content, especially those who left Twitter after Musk’s takeover. With Meta pulling back from political content on Instagram and Threads, X would actually regain its position as the number one source of online election news and speeches if TikTok was no longer present.
There’s no doubt that lawmakers are right to get involved in the nefarious role TikTok could play in the 2024 election. However, scapegoating TikTok arguably wouldn’t solve the larger challenge that our social media landscape is extraordinarily unregulated and controlled by fickle billionaires.