Elon Musk’s proprietorship over Twitter has been strongly characterized by two distinct ideologies. Firstly, his readiness to transform a business radically, which he now suggests may be his approach within federal government. Secondly, his evolution towards a conservative belief system that propagates notions such as the ‘great replacement theory’, anti-Jewish sentiment, and the essential role of Donald Trump. These tendencies have generated significant interest and discussion. Critique of Musk’s business conduct is widespread, citing exemplary incidents such as his rash acquisition of Twitter for an inflated $44 billion in 2022. Further troubled waters lay ahead as he battled in vain to exit the deal in court, negatively impacted the platform’s quality, resulted in advertisers fleeing, and oversaw a substantial depreciation of value.
Musk also seems to have a somewhat adversarial stance towards the news. His contentious interactions with the mainstream media are well-documented and have come to define Twitter as a battlefield of the internet, where finding reliable and unbiased news is like finding a needle in a haystack. Followers must wade through a relentless tide of trending clickbait, questionable headlines engineered for shares, and groundless claims concocted to spark interactions, before they can access trustworthy information. This has placed Elon Musk in a unique category of individuals who have significantly obstructed the propagation of accurate information online.
However, Musk has recently illustrated what truly bothers him about the American news industry – and it’s not the common assumption. His animosity isn’t directed toward mainstream outlets for the supposed dissemination of misinformation, as some might conclude. Being the wealthiest individual globally and on the brink of achieving unparalleled influence over the U.S. government, Musk’s restlessness stems from one element he cannot possess: news. His agitation isn’t rooted in merely desiring to purchase media stations, such as MSNBC, but something much more fundamental: the restriction of outbound links.
Musk affirmed this past week that Twitter inherently curtails the reach of posts promoting links. This behavior was already glaringly evident, particularly when the links pointed to locations Musk showed displeasure towards. Yet, in a recent exchange with tech financier Paul Graham, Musk openly confessed that Twitter intentionally suppresses posts containing links. This indicates something profound about Musk’s perception of the internet.
Musk envisions Twitter as a space for users to remain engaged, immersed within his platform. To him, outbound links are a disruptive element in this vision, given that they play a vital role in redistributing traffic to other sites that produce news and require visitors to sustain their business model. Musk, on the other hand, prefers having these visitors anchored on Twitter. Hence, alongside the subtle encouragement of a platform-heavy user interaction protocol, Musk seeks to minimize diversions by suppressing posts containing outbound links.
This act of throttling links reveals a grand ambition that Musk holds: maintaining the user’s attention on Twitter without being drawn elsewhere. His repeated suggestion for users to share their insights directly on the platform aligns with this narrative. Fundamentally, Musk wishes users to remain confined within the space he governs, without the temptation to distribute their attentiveness elsewhere. This motivation appears to influence Musk more robustly than his disdain for conventional news.
However, Musk appears to have misgauged how users historically interacted with Twitter, despite his lengthy record of active participation on the platform. Prior to Musk’s acquisition, Twitter functioned as an internet junction, providing users a taste of diverse online content without necessitating a commitment to purchase. Its users would often peruse trending news, sports updates, or friends’ comments without breaking their onsite engagement.
Contrary to the belief that most users transitioned out of Twitter to explore linked contents, the reality was somewhat different. Insights from seasoned internet publishers would reveal that Twitter largely functioned as a platform for browsing, rather than for link following. This idiosyncrasy of user behavior was, in fact, beneficial for those who governed the platform. Engaging to journalists, attracting audiences, yet only about 1 in 100 users clicking on a displayed link on Twitter.
Musk, meanwhile, perceived outbound links on Twitter as a threat to user retention. As such, he de-prioritized posts containing links despite the already existing user behavior of rarely clicking them. Yet, the illusion of potential off-site traffic magnetized journalists and influencers who envisioned Twitter as part of their content distribution strategy. This systemic change has likely affected the platform’s dominant users, who increasingly rely on Twitter for their regular dopamine dose.
With the new policies explicitly suppressing link reach, it’s conceivable that some power users may seek alternative platforms that align better with their objectives. Should they leave, their considerable follower base might follow suit. After all, what’s stopping them? While it’s tempting to assign Musk unique animosities against the news media, his approaches mirror that of typical tech magnates in this sector.
Many corporations have implemented similar strategies across different platforms over the years, demonstrating so-called ‘pivoting’ towards and against news. Meta provides a prime example of this: it’s not only a colossal tech giant but also quick to identify and adapt when missing an opportunity to cater to a reachable market segment.
This trend is evident in Meta’s recent decision to tweak its Threads platform, intending to emulate Twitter’s former glory days when news circulated fluently, and users barely bothered to follow links. It begs the question of whether Musk aims to recapture this aspect given that Twitter is teetering on the brink of unprofitability as a standalone business.
The platform’s value proposition seems to be shifting towards curating popularity among conservatives for its owner rather than maintaining its former relevance in the broader online space. Regardless of speculations, only time will tell whether this change in Twitter’s workings will prove to be beneficial or detrimental.