When a social media algorithm shifts from a simple commercial model (i.e., to increase user engagement) to one that is tweaked based on political or ideological motives (i.e. to convince a user of a certain view), the platform ceases to be a social media platform; it becomes a news outlet, or worse still, a propaganda machine.
Pre-X
My first introduction to Twitter was a bit late by modern standards.
It was during the pandemic. I had just led a research team in what was, I felt, a really important enquiry. We had asked the question: has healthcare been inappropriately rationed during Covid?
Our findings were stark and required some public engagement. The Lancet Media team advised us to try engaging the public through social media platforms such as Twitter.
Twitter? I thought. Wasn’t that for sharing holiday snaps and cat pics? I spoke with my younger sister, who, in between laughing, explained what Twitter was all about. She set me up with an account and gave me a bit of advice about getting started on the platform.
It worked.
I learned the key components of a “good tweet” and worked at it for a few months. Within six months, I had reached 50,000 followers and counted among them some pretty influential people - the Director General of the WHO, the shadow Health Secretary, and eventually the First Minister of Scotland. I was being asked to write for newspapers and appear on TV and radio segments. I connected with people through Twitter that I had little chance of engaging with in the real world. In short, I was astonished at the impact Twitter had on our social fabric and the direction of society.
Twitter mattered.
The Fall of Twitter
Watching Twitter descend into the platform it has become under Musk - half shopping channel, half propaganda machine - has been painful. Witnessing the impact on democracies the world over has been even more depressing.
But the deviousness of Musk has come into focus. For him, it doesn’t matter if Twitter survives in its current state or turns a profit. That is, it doesn’t matter to Musk if people continue to use Twitter as a reliable source of news. What matters is who controls the flow of information. Either Twitter will be successfully converted to another news outlet controlled by another oligarch, or it (and its influence) will diminish. Either way, it will be a win for the oligarchs - the truth will remain filtered.
So, then, is it fair to say that Musk paid $44 billion to control the outcome of elections, or, worse still, control how we, the people, think and respond to world events?
Evidence suggests that this is exactly what Musk is doing with Twitter.
Bear in mind that until Musk acquired Twitter, the algorithm was only tweaked for usability. That is, the engineers who adjusted the algorithm were judged on how useful Twitter was to the end user. The Twitter feed was aimed at showing you content that you would be interested in. That all changed when Musk took over Twitter.
Early on in the descent of Twitter, Musk held a “Twitter Space” where he and his engineers discussed the algorithm and the amendments made. During this session, an engineer disclosed that the algorithm had been tweaked to make “Musk’s tweets” more visible. Yes, the algorithm has been tweaked to make Musk and his views more visible on the platform.
This was a monumental change in the principles and motives that governed Twitter’s algorithm. Increasing the visibility of Musk’s tweets had nothing to do with improving the user experience and everything to do with one person gaining access to influence millions.
Subsequently, it has become abundantly clear that Musk wants a platform that bestows his own ideals on everyone else. The value of this is almost immeasurable to Musk. He wants to reshape the world in his image; reform the established views to his own views; win family arguments through public opinion. The profit he is looking for is one of influence.
Today’s X
I have spent little time on Twitter over the last year or so. It has become cumbersome and saturated with odd, somewhat worrying content. Yes, I still see those reliable sources I have always followed, but my feed is interspersed with content I would never choose to view. There are, of course, Musk’s tweets - I neither follow nor have ever engaged with anything he has written. But the algorithm deems it important that I always see his tweets. Then there is the cacophony of bizarre shopping-channel style adverts. Add to this some pro-far right content and videos that simply show aggression and violence, and the entire feed seems like it belongs to someone else. It feels that way, because it does.
Musk bought not only Twitter but your feed as well. He bought access to your thoughts, to your thinking. He bought a way to adjust how you see the news and even how you react to it.
I’m not sure if this meets the criteria for ‘brainwashing’. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. What we can say is that Twitter (now known as “X”) has become a deeply unhealthy place to be, where scrolling the content the algorithm has determined you should see is to submit some of your free will to an overpowered oligarch. It is to accept the anxiety-provoking, divisive position that benefits only those hoarding wealth.
I’m guessing most of us are pretty fed up with submitting our power to those who already have too much. We do, of course, need to first be aware of what is happening on ‘X’.
Twitter became far too toxic for me so I left, for Threads. Another oligarch controls that one too. Recently, I am bombarded with reform loving, migrant hating, supposed "patriots" tweeting (yes, I still call it that!) their racist bile. Fartage appears everywhere. There seems to be no escaping that grifter. BBC, Sky, LBC, platform him constantly and nobody calls out his lies. Yesterday he claimed NOBODY could walk in London after 9pm, wearing jewellery. Obvious bollocks but nobody questions him. Sometimes I despair for humanity.
I started using Twitter around the same time, although I’d had an account for ages before that. I found it very useful during the height of the pandemic. I was getting reliable information from scientists rather than untrustworthy messaging from politicians. Dan, you were one of the people I followed.
After the Musk buyout it rapidly became much harder to do all that. My feed became filled with gibberish from right wingers like Sophie Corcoran and Darren Grimes. I genuinely wondered if they believed a word of what they tweeted and it seemed they were deliberately getting more and more ridiculous, just to see how far they could go before people cottoned on they were spouting utter nonsense.
I got rid of Twitter months ago.