Musk isn’t perfect, but he’s the best bet to steer the future of Twitter

Photo by Media-ite

Musk’s infamous “poop” emoji tweet to the Twitter team. 

After over seven months of pushing and pulling, then arguing and giving silent treatments, the richest person in the world — Elon Musk — and one of the most popular social media platforms in the world — Twitter — have a relationship that parallels that of a RomCom couple. Musk’s journey to acquire Twitter has made a spectacle on headlines ever since he first invested in Twitter on Jan. 14. Musk’s intentions with Twitter are a fresh reminder of the dangers of online hate speech and serve as a clear indicator that we should reevaluate the purpose of social media platforms.

By March 14, Musk was the largest shareholder of Twitter, holding a whopping 9.2% of its stock. Seeing Musk’s apparent interest and enthusiasm for the company, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal welcomed Musk to the Twitter board: “He’s … exactly what we need on @Twitter.”

To the Twitter board’s dismay, Musk rejected the offer and instead offered to buy the company. Twitter initially responded with a resounding no and adopted a poison pill provision to make it more costly for Musk to buy the company. 

Not one month later, Twitter spontaneously agreed to Musk’s acquisition, but Musk himself backed away from the deal because he was concerned about the prevalence of bots and spam accounts on the app.

Twitter has long been notorious for its deluge of fake accounts, which contributes to the amount of toxicity and aggression on the app. However, for years, Twitter has claimed that only 5% of its accounts are bots. When Musk requested proof of this statement, Twitter replied that it was too difficult to retrieve exact evidence. Then came Musk’s infamous tweet on July 22, consisting of a single “poop emoji” in response to Twitter’s lengthy explanation. 

Twitter’s non-response reminds people of all ages — especially teenagers and young adults — to be wary of fake social media accounts and think twice before trusting the claims made by platforms.

Adamant for Musk to buy the company, Twitter sued Musk to force him to complete the deal. In the lawsuit, Twitter said, “Musk apparently believes that he … is free to change his mind, trash the company … and walk away.”

In reality, Twitter’s desire to sell to Musk came from its realization that the company would profit significantly more over time if they sold to Musk; he offered $54 per share, in contrast to the original Twitter stock price of about $38 per share in January. Twitter’s about-face is blatant proof that social media sites and large tech companies often make decisions solely for profit, despite claims otherwise.

The back-and-forths of the Musk-Twitter deal continue to this day. On Oct. 4, Musk changed his previous decision and announced that he would complete the deal of acquiring Twitter, but the decision has still not been finalized as of Oct. 25.

Most spectators scoff at Musk’s venture to get ahold of Twitter. They wonder: What will the SpaceX and Tesla CEO do with a social media app?

But Musk has big visions for Twitter, and the app will undergo positive reformation in his hands. In fact, Musk should take over Twitter, with his goal to “unlock” the company’s potential by transforming the app into a global platform for free speech. Back in April, Musk criticized Twitter’s minimal efforts to stem harassment and hate speech on the app. While bots can be found on every social media platform, Twitter is the most known for being home to aggressive exchanges between users. 

It is a relief that an entrepreneur like Musk recognizes the prevalence of hate speech and intends to use his wealth and authority to resolve the issue. Online hate speech correlates to a global increase in violence toward minorities and makes society more susceptible to mass shootings and ethnic cleansing. Musk’s theory, “free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy,” is correct. 

On the flip side, unleashing complete free speech has its downsides because users will be at liberty to spread false information and hate speech will not receive as much regulation — this is the paradox of free speech. But Musk’s intention to restrict bots and spam accounts does mark a step forward in Twitter’s future. The Twitter board’s unwillingness to even verify the number of spam bots on their app makes Musk a better candidate for leading Twitter than the current team.

But not so many are on board with Musk’s idea of emulating WeChat, a blown-up Chinese “super app” that boasts a whopping 1.24 billion users. Nearly every adult and teenager in China uses the app daily, and so do millions of Chinese-American adults and young adults in our country. Users can message, post, shop and explore to their leisure on the app.

WeChat’s greatest selling point is its “WeChat Pay” feature, which allows users to make in-person and online transactions, as well as send friends money within seconds. Most stores in China no longer accept credit or cash, and instead use WeChat-stored currency. Because WeChat encompasses so many necessary everyday activities, the app’s prevalence is unmatched. But doubts are high, and there are flaws to Musk’s plan. Large tech apps such as Facebook, Google, TikTok, SnapChat and Uber have attempted to meld with the Chinese “super-app” style, and it hasn’t worked well for them. 

Additionally, China has a different social media culture, from the way technology is utilized to the way social media platforms function. It is easier to popularize an app in China than it is in the U.S. For example, on popular Chinese platforms like WeChat and Weibo, being a “fan account” or “stan” of a public figure is a formal occupation that earns users yearly profit. There are far more serious users on Chinese platforms than on American platforms because social media, to some Chinese users, is their workspace. So while curbing Twitter hate speech is a positive and realistic goal, transforming Twitter into the American version of WeChat does not sound plausible. 

Musk’s plan has its holes, but even if his visions are not guaranteed to succeed, Musk has a better chance of succeeding than the current Twitter board does. It is time for Twitter to be turned into a more nurturing and accepting environment. Spectators of the Musk-Twitter battle, regardless of whose side they support, should all walk away with a new understanding of the duplicity of social media platforms and strive to encourage safety and authenticity in the online realm.