Nick Clegg, a prominent figure at Meta and once a UK Deputy Prime Minister, has criticized Elon Musk's stewardship of X, formerly Twitter. He asserts that Musk's influence has pushed X towards ideological partisanship, which contrasts with Meta's systematic content oversight.
Strategies in Content Management at Meta
During an event at Chatham House in London, Clegg stressed the role of content oversight on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. He critiqued Musk's more hands-off policy, suggesting that it might lead to adverse situations. He pointed out that individuals like Andrew Tate and Tommy Robinson, banned from Meta services, have shifted to platforms like X and Telegram, which could energize far-right movements in the UK.
Highlighting Meta's work with regulators in the UK and EU on evolving content moderation rules, Clegg called attention to Meta's objective to build a safer online environment. He contrasted this with X, describing it as a niche platform whose focus on news and politics does not resonate with the mass user base. Facebook and Instagram, he noted, engage users through more entertaining rather than politically charged content.
Social Media Platform Dynamics
Clegg, with a notable audience on X, characterized the platform as predominantly serving influential groups. He believes that Meta's platforms attract a larger, more diverse audience because of their engaging and diverse offerings. The view is part of the broader debate on how social media networks address content oversight and user protection.
Meta has shifted away from emphasizing news and political topics, recognizing user preferences for other content. This type of content now makes up less than 3% of all material on Meta platforms. The change coincides with the introduction of Threads, a Meta app emphasizing categories like sports over traditional news or politics.
Musk Stokes Controversy
Despite owning one of the most widely used content platforms, Musk seems to use X as his own soapbox. He has also consistently used the platform to rally against his opponents or to promote his causes. Earlier this month, X was banned in Brazil, a decision that was later upheld in court.
The restriction on X began on a Saturday morning, stemming from an ongoing dispute between Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes and X's owner, Elon Musk. The conflict started in April when Justice Moraes ordered various accounts to be suspended for spreading disinformation, targeting primarily supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro.
The decision provoked extensive discourse within the country. Justice Moraes convened a five-judge panel to review the suspension. Justice Flávio Dino remarked on the necessity of balancing free speech with responsibility, stating, “The inseparability of freedom of expression and responsibility must be acknowledged.”
Elon Musk castigated the ruling, labeling it a politically motivated action by an “unelected pseudo-judge” that jeopardizes democratic principles. Moraes' ruling also directed companies like Apple and Google to remove X from app stores within five days and to block its functionality on iOS and Android devices. VPN users accessing X risk fines of R$50,000 ($8,910; £6,780).
Now It's Australia's Turn
This week, Musk has turned his anger to Australia, labelling lawmakers in the country as fascist. He provided the feedback after learning about potential fines that could reach 5% of a tech company's yearly turnover.
The proposal gives Australia's communication regulator the power to supervise digital entities, and if self-regulation efforts fail, a binding code of conduct may be initiated. Anika Wells, the minister for aged care, argued that there is no authoritarian motive in the government's actions, highlighting the law's focus on public safety rather than silencing dissent.
