If share price is anything to go by, Tesla is in trouble. The market capitalisation of the electric vehicle (EV) company has fallen by 73% from its record high in November 2021, causing concern for investors.

On the face of it, there is no crisis. The cars are still the benchmark for performance. The underlying technology and the sophistication of the software remain preeminent. The supercharging network of fast EV charging stations is the envy of competitors. Its cutting-edge assembly plant and gigafactories (for large-scale production of EV batteries) supports peak productivity.

Tesla’s direct-to-customer sales model has also allowed for rapid market penetration and was resilient under pandemic conditions. It continues to provide huge savings in fixed costs. The Model 3 – which is assembled in China, where costs are low, and has been presented as the brand’s first high-volume EV – has been successful. Tesla’s new factory in Germany, which makes its Model Y, was producing 3,000 cars per week by the end of 2022.

And after first reporting a profit in 2020 – following years of losses in a dash for growth – in the 12 months to September 2022 Tesla profits reached US$11.19 billion (£9.8 billion). This was more than double the previous 12 months. So why the concern?

Tesla’s position as market leader is being threatened by growing competition in EV production just as rumours have started to swirl that investors might be concerned about Musk’s ability to successfully lead both the car company and Twitter. He bought the social media platform last October following fraught negotiations with its board. He has since suggested he will step down as Twitter’s CEO But has yet to announce a timeline for that. Meanwhile, Tesla clearly needs more attention than it is currently getting.

Traditional vehicle manufacturers and new entrants are crowding into the EV market, encouraged by government mandates on ending sales of petrol and diesel cars. Tesla’s technology edge is being eroded, putting pressure on the premium positioning of the brand. Tesla has been fortunate in that supply constraints, especially in semiconductors, have thus far reduced this pressure. As those supply constraints ease, however, the pressure on Tesla will grow.

Tesla has also endured its own setbacks. Musk has been able to transition the company to true mass production, but he famously described the company’s new plants in Germany and Texas as “gigantic money furnaces”. https://player.cnbc.com/p/gZWlPC/cnbc_global?playertype=synd&byGuid=7000250979

Musk has said he wants Tesla to produce 20 million vehicles annually by 2030, but this is enormously ambitious. The car maker has recently experienced production delays, supply shortages, controversies over its claims about the safety and development of its self-driving and Autopilot system, and vehicle recalls relating to a software issue affecting vehicle tail lamps “in rare instances”. The business has also suffered from turbulent COVID-related conditions in China – an important parts supplier – and 2023 is likely to continue to be challenging for many in the global automotive industry as the world’s major economies slow down.

What might help Tesla now is to be managed more like a traditional car company.

Back to basics

Production needs to be increased rapidly to meet Musk’s delivery promises, but without compromise on quality. The challenge thereafter will be to expand the brand to smaller vehicle types than the Model 3, while retaining the cachet that allows for premium pricing.

With nearly 100,000 employees worldwide, Tesla will also need to be more cost conscious. This is especially true as material and component input prices are rising rapidly.

Tesla also needs to do more to capture value from cars that are already in use. The company is notable for owning much of the inbound supply chain for its batteries and their materials, but it has been slow to identify earning opportunities from the entire life cycle of its cars. Competitors including VW Group and Renault in Europe and NIO in China are pioneering new “whole life cycle” business models that capture value for manufacturers from the sale, use, second use, and eventual recycling of vehicles. This makes Tesla’s “sales only” approach look dated.

Tesla’s declining share price

Investor sentiment is obviously key when it comes to Tesla’s declining share price, however. The company could manage this by being more cautious when announcing forecasts for production, sales, new models and technology breakthroughs to avoid surprising or disappointing investors.

With this in mind, it’s not surprising that, for investors, the biggest issue to be resolved at Tesla may be Musk’s role. There are two questions involved: is Musk sufficiently engaged in the future of Tesla and can Tesla continue to prosper from association with Musk?

In Tesla’s latest tranche of stock sales in December 2022, Musk reduced his share of the business to 13.4%, although he remains the largest single shareholder. Some observers linked this sale to the need to finance other business interests, notably Twitter.

The risk is that Musk becomes more of a liability than an asset to the business. While also running Twitter, Musk may not be able to give Tesla the attention it needs as it grows, and as its competition becomes more intense. But Musk’s maverick personality, and especially the management style he’s displayed while running Twitter, could potentially damage the Tesla brand and unnerve Tesla employees and investors.

Indeed, the characteristics that have made Musk such a successful disrupter may not be so appropriate for a maturing and institutionalised multinational. Musk and Tesla have long seemed synonymous. It seems that the time may have come for that to end.

Peter Wells, Professor of Business and Sustainability, Cardiff University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

In a strong response to a recent Twitter poll posted by Elon Musk, users of the platform have called for him to relinquish his position as CEO. Musk has responded that he’ll step down when he “finds someone foolish enough” to take over as CEO, saying he will run the software and server teams instead. But any replacement will need to be able to steer Twitter back to calmer waters, with Musk remaining majority owner.

It’s been a tumultuous year for Twitter and Musk. He began building up shares in the company in January 2022 and his US$44 billion (£36 billion) bid to buy the platform was accepted in April. He then tried to pull out of the deal in July, before finally taking ownership in October. Since then he has made – and sometimes walked back – numerous changes to the popular social media platform.

Indeed, Musk’s reaction to finally getting his hands on Twitter has been reminiscent of Christmas morning, when children rip open presents, display initial excitement and then quickly lose interest. Musk may have imagined that owning the website would be fun and make him feel powerful.

But the reality has been rather different. He has been criticised and abused, both online and in real life and now 57.5% of more than 17.5 million Twitter users have voted for him to stand down as its CEO.

Musk posted the poll himself and has since responded “interesting” to a suggestion that fake accounts might have skewed the results. He also agreed that only paid subscribers should be able to vote on future Twitter policy changes.

There has been some speculation that Musk has come under pressure from other Twitter shareholders and lenders to move on. Further, Musk has been selling billions in Tesla stock and its share price is down by over 60% this year. Shareholders in the car firm would probably like their hitherto successful CEO back full time.

So, if Twitter wants to find a new CEO, what sort of person should the troubled social media platform be looking for? As a student of leadership, I can see three key requirements for anyone considering – or being considered for – this role right now:

1. Confidence and independence

A new Twitter CEO will want assurances that they will be free to take decisions about the direction of the business without being second-guessed by Musk as the majority owner. So the new CEO will need to be confident, perhaps even arrogant, and ready to stand their ground.

2. The ability to face facts

The new leader will have to “confront the brutal facts” of the situation – according to management expert Jim Collins, this is how to begin productive change. Twitter is struggling financially.

Musk paid US$44 billion to buy it, perhaps twice what it was worth. He has borrowed huge sums and sold large tranches of Tesla stock to help fund the acquisition. But he could now face interest payments to lenders of up to US$1 billion a year unless Twitter’s financial health can be turned around. These are the brutal facts a new leader must confront.

3. An imaginative approach to management

The social media platform’s current position leads on to a third requirement for the new leader: imagination. Twitter is a resounding practical success. It is influential and powerful. It has certainly sped up the flow of information (admittedly, inaccurate information as well as the useful kind).

And it can be a force for good – for example providing data and advice during the COVID-19 pandemic or helping to highlight the failings of politicians or the media – even with the unpleasantness and abuse that seem to be an unavoidable part of tweeting.

But is it really a commercial proposition? It is not a platform like Facebook or Instagram that can deliver billions of users to potential advertisers. Indeed, many prominent advertisers left the site apparently in response to Musk’s chaotic decision making.

Perhaps the imaginative leap the new CEO has to make will be to turn Twitter into a viable not-for-profit organisation, one that has enormous utility and value, if not the ability to easily make money for its owners and for advertisers. In this case, a core task for the new CEO will be to recognise what sort of business Twitter is, and decide whether it is really a conventional for-profit business at all.

Sticking with the plan

And this leads us to a major task for any future Twitter CEO – and perhaps the heart of the problem with Twitter. Musk changes his mind frequently – sometimes within hours, as we saw recently when he appeared to walk back a policy change regarding users’ ability to link to other social media accounts. He may rethink stepping down, or even appoint someone only to sack them.

This brings us to a very valuable leadership lesson that the maverick Musk has taught everyone in recent months: we should hesitate before labelling forceful people as great leaders in any setting until we have seen what their long-term impact has been.

Stefan Stern, Visiting Professor of Management Practice, Bayes Business School, City, University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The first try last month came just 10 days after Musk’s $44 billion takeover of the platform and massive rounds of layoffs that saw the employee count go down by almost half, including the crucial content moderation teams.

Twitter Blue which costs $8 per month for users accessing Twitter on the web and $11 if signing up on an Apple device, is being relaunched in only a handful of countries apart from the United States.

The service which enables users to receive the coveted blue checkmark on their accounts, indicating verification by Twitter, was previously free of charge, but reserved for well-known organizations and public figures, in an attempt to avoid impersonation and misinformation.

The relaunch came the same day as reports that Musk disbanded Twitter’s Trust and Safety Council, created with the intent to tap into global experts for help in shaping strategies around hate speech, child safety, civil rights and other sensitive issues.

Since his takeover, critics have tussled with Mr. Musk, who has described himself as a free-speech absolutist and vowed to let people tweet whatever they want, within the law.

Musk believes that the previous ownership of Twitter held a strong left-wing bias and had unfairly banned accounts, including that of former US president Donald Trump.

On Sunday, Musk lashed out against the outgoing key US government advisor to the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Anthony Fauci.

‘My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci,’ Musk had said.

Mr. Musk’s tweets came as Dr Fauci prepared to step down as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the end of this year.

Amongst others, former NASA astronaut Scott Kelly also opposed Musk’s tweet and replied, ‘Elon, please don’t mock and promote hate toward already marginalised and at-risk-of-violence members of the #LGBTQ+ community. They are real people with real feelings. Furthermore, Dr. Fauci is a dedicated public servant whose sole motivation was saving lives.’

Musk responded to Kelly, saying ‘I strongly disagree. Forcing your pronouns upon others when they didn’t ask, and implicitly ostracizing those who don’t, is neither good nor kind to anyone. As for Fauci, he lied to Congress and funded gain-of-function research that killed millions of people. Not awesome imo.’

Mr. Musk has been at the helm of many decisions that have led to debate, after taking over Twitter, with his many vacillating changes to the platform and his political stance.

What do a cybersecurity researcher building a system to generate alerts for detecting security threats and vulnerabilities, a wildfire watcher who tracks the spread of forest fires, and public health professionals trying to predict enrollment in health insurance exchanges have in common?

They all rely on analyzing data from Twitter.

Twitter is a microblogging service, meaning it’s designed for sharing posts of short segments of text and embedded audio and video clips. The ease with which people can share information among millions of others worldwide on Twitter has made it very popular for real-time conversations. Whether it is people tweeting about their favorite sports teams, or organizations and public figures using Twitter to reach a mass audience, Twitter has been part of the collective record for over a decade.

The Twitter archives allow for instant and complete access to every public tweet, which has positioned Twitter both as a archive of collective human behavior and as a credentialing and fact-checking service on a global scale. As a researcher who studies social media, I believe that these functions are very valuable for academics, policymakers and anyone using aggregate data to obtain insights into human behavior.

The proliferation of scams and brand impersonators, the hemorrhaging of advertisers, and disarray within the company call the future of the platform into question. If Twitter were to go under, the loss would reverberate around the world.

Analyzing human behavior

With its massive trove of tweets, Twitter has provided new ways to quantify public discourse and new tools to map aggregate perceptions, and offers a window into large-scale human behavior. Such digital traces or records of human activity allow researchers in fields ranging from social sciences to healthcare to analyze a variety of phenomena.

From open source intelligence to citizen science, Twitter has not only been a digital public square, but has also allowed researchers to infer attitudes that are difficult to detect through methods from traditional field research. For example, people’s willingness to pay for policies and services that address climate change has traditionally been measured through surveys of subjective well-being. Twitter sentiment data gives researchers and policymakers another tool for assessing these attitudes in order to take more meaningful action on climate change.

Researchers in public health have found an association between tweeting about HIV and incidence of HIV, and have been able to measure sentiment at the neighborhood level to assess the overall health of the people in those neighborhoods.

Place and time

Geotagged data from Twitter helps in a variety of fields such as urban land use and disaster resilience. Being able to identify the locations for a set of tweets allows researchers to correlate information in the tweets with times and places – for example, correlating tweets and ZIP codes to identify hot spots of vaccine hesitancy.

Twitter has been invaluable in the field of open source intelligence (OSINT), particularly for tracking down war crimes. OSINT uses crowdsourcing to identify the locations of photos and videos. In Ukraine, human rights investigators have focused on using Twitter and TikTok to search for evidence of abuses.

Open source intelligence has also been helpful for cutting through the fog of war. For example, OSINT analysts were quick to provide evidence that the missile that exploded in Przewodow, Poland near the Ukrainian border on Nov. 15, 2022 was likely an S-300 antiaircraft missile and unlikely a ballistic or cruise missile fired by Russia.

Credentialing and verification

Although misinformation has been disseminated far and wide on Twitter, the platform also serves a role as a global verification mechanism. First, vast numbers of people use Twitter and other social media platforms. With crowdsourcing writ large, social media assumes the role of an authoritative information provider, reducing some of the uncertainty people face in searching for new information. The platforms perform a credentialing role that some scholars refer to as “public relevance algorithms,” in that they have replaced dedicated business or technical expertise in identifying what people need to know.

Another way has been official credentialing. Prior to Elon Musk’s takeover, Twitter’s verification method provided public figures with a blue check mark on their profiles, which served as a shortcut in establishing whether a source of a tweet was who the person claimed to be.

While problems such as fake news, misinformation and hate speech exist, the credentialing ability coupled with the vast number of people who use the platform in real time made Twitter a provider of credible information and a fact-checker.

The digital public square

Twitter’s dual role in fostering real-time communication and acting as an arbitrator of authoritative information is of crucial interest to academics, journalists and government agencies. During the pandemic, for example, many public health agencies turned to Twitter to promote behavior that mitigates the risk of infection.

During disasters and emergencies, Twitter has been a great venue for crowdsourced eyewitness data. During Hurricane Harvey, for example, researchers found that that users responded and interacted the most with tweets from verified Twitter accounts, and especially from government organizations. Official Twitter accounts helped in the rapid dissemination of information during a water contamination crisis in West Virginia. Twitter data has also helped in hurricane evacuations.

Twitter has also been an important way for people with disabilities to participate in public discourse.

Twitter’s real value has been in enabling people to connect with each other in real time and as an archive of collective behavior. Recognizing this, international organizations, government agencies and local governments have invested significant resources in using Twitter and have come to rely on the platform. Sen. Edward Markey has described Twitter as “essential” to American society. If Twitter were to collapse, there’s no clear replacement in sight.

Anjana Susarla, Professor of Information Systems, Michigan State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Since Elon Musks’ buyout of the Twitter, the micro-blogging and social media service the world’s richest man has wasted no time in making changes. Within hours of his $44billion purchase on the 28th of October, Mr Musk called a meeting of various Twitter human resource executives in the company’s San Francisco office and advised all concerned to read the various facets of the company for widespread redundancies. It is understood Elon Musk had said the workforce must be slashed immediately, and further that those who were no longer needed would not receive bonuses due to be paid on Nov. 1.

Terminating Employment

It is understood that Mr Musk was warned of the risk it posed to violating employment laws and that workers were at risk of having their contracts breached. The executives warned the billionaire of the risks of employee lawsuits that could arise. In reply, Mr Musk’s team reassured the executives that Musk was not worried about the risks and was used to going to court and paying any penalties due.

It was clear change was happening immediately within the structure of Twitter, possibly against the advice of Twitter’s own executives who then set work to action Mr Musks’ plan. But within days Musk had come to his senses in regard to the financial implications of costly lawsuits and hefty fines that would follow his actions. During this time Twitter’s managers struggled to keep up with the pace of dismissals and the required procedures. This prompted Musk to hold off the redundancy process until after the 1st of November.

The process started by Musk has been painful for some of Twitter’s retained employees, and in some cases devastating for those whose employment was terminated. During this time Musk publicly announced that Twitter was in poor financial condition. The New York Times reported that he had said “There’s a massive negative cash flow, and bankruptcy is not out of the question,”

With a view to fixing Twitter’s issues, Mr Musk then put a team of his own advisors and executives in place within Twitter. However, some Twitter employees felt they were being mistreated and many found the process to be emotionally painful to endure. With such radical changes to a workforce being so quickly put into place, questions are being raised as to how the remaining employees will pick up the pieces and how successful Twitter will be as a result in the future.

Verification Subscriptions

The new business model introduced by Musk brings in a $8 a month charge to either receive or retain the coveted blue tick verification mark on their profiles. Its introduction did not get off to a smooth start and was paused shortly afterwards when some Twitter users took to impersonating big brands on the platform and then sending misleading or disruptive tweets. 

The announcement by musk that a moderation council would be formed to vet tweets for suitability did not stop many big brand clients that used Twitter for marketing to pause their advertising on the platform.

Other revenue generation has been discussed by Musk’s team including the possible addition of paid direct messaging which would permit users to send private messages to high-profile Twitter users. 

It is clear that Musk views these changes at Twitter to be critical to the long-term viability of the platform, but with major advertisers’ spending paused it may not be a straightforward task to restore the viability of Twitter marketing campaigns to their marketing teams.

Twitter Users

Whatever you use Twitter for, whether it’s to keep updated with the news, to check sports scores or even to search for new trustly casinos, the platform is facing a real threat of extinction. This threat is compounded as some of the platform’s users search for other social media platforms that could replace Twitter for their micro-blogging needs.

One rival platform has seen more media coverage than the other hopefuls, Mastodon, the social media platform running on open-source software and a decentralised model, has seen a marked upturn in new users. But in reality, Mastodon and the other alternative possibilities are small in comparison with Twitter. Mastodon has just over a million accounts, whereas twitter holds almost 400 million accounts.

It is very early days to assess the fallout for Musk’s takeover in the number of account holders, Twitter is a well-established platform and it would take an exodus of huge proportions to change that, so the future of Twitter may be a far more financially governed risk than one of simple popularity.

The Future Prospects for Twitter

Twitter has been described as the town square of the world, its view of a social media platform for the people of the world to thrash their differences out and gauge public opinion. But other models for social media are snapping at Twitter’s heels. TiKTok has become so popular in recent years, but it has a completely different ethos behind it. TikTok has not been without controversy, the platform is accused of wilfully helping the Chinese government spy on its population. They are not the first Chinese company to be called into question in this way. Hawaii, the Chinese communication giant is currently banned to trade with the US.

This differing approach to their business models highlights a split that appears to be forming within social media. In one fork, Twitter would like to be a sounding board for the world, with the ability to empower its citizens to influence governments in their decisions. The other possibly more focused on permitting a government to monitor and control its population.

Of course, Twitter has to prove itself financially viable first, something TikTok is extremely good at with monetisation at the heart of the app. Social media is always something that is fast-paced and you never know when the latest platform will come and take over – Mark Zuckerberg will be hoping it will be the Metaverse whilst many will assume Twitter will stay just as popular – we’ll just have to wait and see. 

Disclaimer:

• As per the Public Gambling Act of 1867, all Indian states, except Goa, Daman and Sikkim, prohibit gambling
• Land-based casinos are legalized, with certain guidelines, in Goa and Daman, as per the Goa, Daman and Diu Public Gambling Act 1976  
• Land-based casinos, Online gambling and E-gaming (games of chance) are legalized in Sikkim under the Sikkim Online Gaming (Regulation) Rules 2009
• Only some Indian states have legalized online/regular lotteries as per and subject to the conditions laid down by state laws. Kindly refer to the same here
• Horse racing and betting on horse racing, including online betting, is permitted only in a licensed premise in select states. Kindly refer to the 1996 Judgement by the Supreme Court Of India here and for more information
• This article does not endorse or express the views of Qrius and/or any of its staff.

Several employees appeared to have quit following a deadline by Musk, as the company sent messages it was closing its ‘office buildings’ temporarily.

There has also been some confusion regarding the company’s remote work policy, as many conversations appear to have been held with key employees.

‘In his pitch, Mr Musk said that he knew how to win and that those who wanted to win should join him,’ the New York Times reported.

‘In one of those meetings, some employees were summoned to a conference room in the San Francisco office while others called in via videoconference. As the 5 pm deadline passed, some who had called in began hanging up, seemingly having decided to leave, even as Mr. Musk continued speaking’ the report added.

Over the past few weeks, there has been a wave of resignations, starting with the top brass, including India-origin CEO Parag Agarwal, as the company is being restructured under its new owner.

Musk recently acquired the social media giant for USD 44 billion last month and half of Twitter’s 7,500 full-time workers, including over 200 employees in India, were laid off.

Employees have been told to be ‘extremely hard core’ to make the company a success and were given 36 hours to leave or commit to what is being called ‘Twitter 2.0.’

The NYT report added that the ‘shedding of so many employees in such a compressed period has raised questions about how Twitter will keep operating effectively.’

The business magnate and new owner of Twitter Elon Musk revealed a while ago that he is autistic. Musk, the wealthiest person in the world, is autistic. Musk, a fellow of the prestigious Royal Society and Time’s 2021 Person of the Year, is autistic. One of the most famous people on Earth is autistic. Perhaps it is worth letting that sink in?

As autism researchers, we think it is important to raise awareness of and improve attitudes towards autism. There is now a growing appreciation of “neurodiversity” in society, especially in the science and technology sector. There has also been discussion of how people, such as environmental campaigner Greta Thunberg, can be great activists due to their autistic traits (although there is no statistical link between autism and environmentalism).

It is surprising, then, that there has been so little discussion of Musk’s autism. Not only would this be useful for understanding Musk, who is now an influential but increasingly criticised figure, but it might also go a long way to highlighting autism-related strengths and difficulties.

It is important to remember that he is neither representative of the autistic population nor the general one. But, if we believe that individual experiences matter, Musk’s story is a chance to learn about him, autism and neurodiversity. Given his defining position in society, it is worth trying to understand Musk rather than leaving public discourse to sour further. https://www.youtube.com/embed/cdZZpaB2kDM?wmode=transparent&start=2557

Bullying

Musk has shared stories of his social struggles as a child. He reports being bullied and “almost beaten to death” for being different. In a documentary, Musk’s mother talks about him as a “young genius”, but also a shy and awkward child without friends. Together, Musk has what psychologists call a “developmental history” of autistic characteristics and adverse experiences of not being accepted in childhood.

Abuse directed at Musk for being autistic has continued into adulthood, with a Twitter executive referring to him as “literally special needs” and “a looney tune”. Only a few people called this out. This is sadly reflective of the bullying that autistic people face in the workplace and more generally.

Such hostility is thought to partly explain why autistic people face the highest rates of unemployment of all disabled groups. Musk is in a much more powerful position to defend himself than most others. But it is possible that the bullying he’s experienced throughout his life speaks to why he can be defensive and combative on Twitter.

It is also worth remembering that, although Musk appears emotionally robust, there is often more going on beneath the surface for autistic and neurodivergent people. Our research shows that autistic people use psychologically exhausting coping strategies, such as “masking” or hiding their authentic self, which can worsen mental health. This is why autism is considered an “invisible disability”.

Literal thinking

Autism is also sometimes linked to a literal way of thinking. This was epitomised by Musk physically carrying a bathroom sink into Twitter HQ, which he has recently taken ownership of, as a play on the common phrase “let that sink in”.

It was, of course, a publicity stunt, but he might also have been making a comical point from the fact that many idioms don’t literally make sense. The non-literal use of words like this doesn’t necessarily come naturally to autistic people.

While some people understand and appreciate this unconventional style of humour, many are likely to think it is strange or inappropriate. This has probably contributed to the polarised opinions about Musk, which might partly reflect differences in humour between autistic and non-autistic people, as revealed by research.

Appearing on the US hit show Saturday Night Live, Musk himself commented on how his autistic communication style can be unusual and humorous: “I don’t always have a lot of intonation or variation in how I speak … which I’m told makes for great comedy.”

An unusual way of speaking has indeed been linked to autism in research. For example, autistic people may have different acoustic features of their speech, such as pitch, which can make them appear blunt or rude. That is how Musk might be coming across in public situations, following his acquisition of social media giant Twitter.

Musk’s achievements are also likely to reflect autistic strengths in science and tech that are worth celebrating. In an interview last year, he talked about how he “found it rewarding to spend all night programming computers … just by myself”.

This dedication to specific interests, instead of socially conventional activities such as playing with friends as children, might explain why some autistic people have extraordinary talents and can sometimes outperform non-autistic people on certain tasks. Research on this is sparse but growing.

One of the world’s most famous people being autistic will invariably raise awareness of autism. This is what researchers, charities and the autism community have been trying to do for decades. If remembering that Musk is autistic can advance this endeavour, it may be worthwhile.

Punit Shah, Associate Professor of Psychology, University of Bath; Luca Hargitai, PhD Researcher in Psychology, University of Bath, and Lucy Anne Livingston, Lecturer in Psychology, King’s College London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

For a man who made a fortune from electric cars, the Twitter takeover has turned into a fairly bumpy ride so far. Soon after buying the social media company for US$44 billion (£38 billion), Elon Musk said he had “no choice” about laying off a large proportion of the company’s staff.

He has already faced a backlash over his move to charge Twitter users a monthly fee for their “blue tick” verified status. And those users should also be concerned about plans from the self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” to reduce content moderation.

Moderation, the screening and blocking of unacceptable online content, has been in place for as long as the internet has existed. And after becoming an increasingly important and sophisticated feature against a rising tide of hate speech, misinformation and illegal content, it should not be undone lightly.

Anything which weakens filters, allowing more harmful content to reach our screens, could have serious implications for human rights, both online and offline.

For it is not just governments which are responsible for upholding human rights – businesses are too. And when different human rights clash, as they sometimes do, that clash needs to be managed responsibly.

Social media has proved itself to be an extremely powerful way for people around the world to assert their human right to freedom of expression – the freedom to seek, receive and impart all kinds of information and ideas.

But freedom of expression is not without limits. International human rights law prohibits propaganda for war, as well as advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. It also allows for restrictions necessary to ensure that rights or reputations are respected.

So Twitter, in common with other online platforms, has a responsibility to respect freedom of expression. But equally, it has a responsibility not to allow freedom of expression to override other human rights completely.

After all, harmful online content is often used to restrict the freedom of expression of others. Sometimes, online threats spill over to the offline world and cause irreparable physical and emotional harm.

Any moves to remove content moderation therefore risk breaching corporate human rights obligations. Unlimited freedom of expression for some almost inevitably results in the restriction elsewhere of that exact same freedom. And the harm is unlikely even to stop there.

Musk claims that Twitter will now become a more democratic “town square”. But without content moderation, his privately owned version of a town square could become dysfunctional and dangerous.

Twitter – again, like most other social media platforms – has long been linked to overt expressions of racism and misogyny, with a flood of racist tweets even surfacing after Musk closed his deal.

And while Musk reassures us that Twitter will not become a “hellscape”, it is important to remember that content moderation is not the same as censorship. In fact, moderation may facilitate genuine dialogue by cracking down on the spam and toxic talk which often disrupt communication on social media.

User friendly?

Moderation also offers reassurance. Without it, Twitter risks losing users who may leave for alternative platforms considered safer and a better ideological fit.

Valuable advertisers are also quick to move away from online spaces they consider divisive and risky. General Motors was one of the first big brands to announce a temporary halt on paid advertising on Twitter after Musk took over.

Of course, we do not yet know exactly what Musk’s version of Twitter will eventually look like. But there have been suggestions that content moderation teams may be disbanded in favour of a “moderation council”.

If it is similar to the “oversight board” at Meta (formerly Facebook), content decisions are set to be outsourced to an external party representing diverse views. But if Twitter has less internal control and accountability, harmful content may become a harder beast to tame.

Such abdication of responsibility risks breaching Twitter’s human rights obligations, and having a negative impact both on individuals affected by harmful content, and on the overall approach to human rights adopted by other online platforms.

So as one (extremely) wealthy businessman claims to “free” the blue Twitter bird for the sake of humanity, he also gains commercial control of what has been conceived as being a relatively democratic social space until now. What he does next will have serious ramifications for our human rights in a digital age.

Content moderation is by no way a panacea and the claim that social media platforms are “arbiters of the truth” is problematic for many reasons. We must also not forget the emotional and psychological toll of human content moderators having to view “the worst of humanity” to protect our screens. Yet, sanitisation of social platforms is also not the answer. The internet is a better place when the most successful platforms engage in human rights-focused screening – for everyone’s benefit.

Sarah Glozer, Senior Lecturer in Marketing & Society, University of Bath; Emily Jane Godwin, PhD Candidate in Cyber Security, University of Bath, and Rita Mota, Assistant Professor, Department of Society, Politics and Sustainability, ESADE

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

It’s been a week since Elon Musk strode into the Twitter headquarters with a kitchen sink, signalling his official takeover of the company.

Having had some time to let the news of his US$44 billion (about A$70 billion) purchase “sink in”, Twitter users are now wondering what he’ll do with the platform.

What’s Musk going to do with Twitter?

After months of trying to walk away from his commitment to buy the platform, and just before entering what was looking to be a long, potentially embarrassing and costly court battle to enforce his original agreement, Twitter is now privately owned.

If we wade through some of the early reactionary media punditry, we see Musk has paid far too much for a platform that has not yet fulfilled its business potential to investors, nor its social potential to users.

This probably explains some of his first moves since taking over, such as planning to charge users US$8 (adjusted by country) for a blue tick, and threatening to fire half of Twitter’s staff.

He has already fired previous CEO Parag Agrawal, chief financial officer Ned Segal, head of legal Vijaya Gadde and general counsel Sean Edgett.

Will Twitter turn into (more of) a bin fire?

Musk’s intentions were perhaps best signalled with his first tweet after he bought the platform: “the bird is freed”.

Before the purchase, one of his oft-tweeted criticisms of Twitter was that there were too many limits on “free speech”, and moderation would need to be reframed to unlock Twitter’s potential as a “de facto public town square”.

There’s no doubt Musk is quite good at performative social media statements, but we’re yet to see any actual changes made to content moderation – let alone Musk’s utopian vision of a digital town square.

The “chief twit” has suggested the future appointment of “a content moderation council with widely diverse viewpoints” that would be charged with making decisions about moderation and account reinstatements.

This isn’t a new idea. Meta has convened such an oversight board since 2018, made up of former political leaders, human rights activists, academics and journalists. The board oversees content decisions and has been known to oppose CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s decisions, in particular his “indefinite” Facebook suspension of former US president Donald Trump after the US Capitol building riots.

It’s unclear whether a council would convene to discuss Musk’s suggestion to “reverse the permanent ban” Twitter imposed on Trump, or if Musk would allow a board to override his decisions.

Nonetheless, Musk’s suggestion of a moderation board is a step back from his previously self-described “free speech absolutist” views on content moderation.

Many have been concerned his approach to moderation may fuel more hate speech on Twitter.

In the past week, co-ordinated troll accounts have tried to test the limits of a Musk-run Twitter by flooding the platform with racial slurs. According to the US-based National Contagion Research Institute, the use of the N-word skyrocketed by more than 500% on October 28. However, the head of safety and integrity at Twitter, Yoel Roth, said many of the offending tweets came from a small number of accounts.

Another study by Montclair State University researchers found a massive spike in hateful terms in the lead-up to Musk’s acquisition.

Both Roth and Musk have confirmed “Twitter’s policies haven’t changed”. Rules on “hateful conduct” remain the same.

Musk remains a loose cannon

Perhaps more concerning than troll reactions is Musk’s decision to tweet and then delete a conspiracy theory about US house speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul Pelosi. We could dismiss this as Musk’s love of sh-tposting, but if the right to post disinformation and personal attacks is the kind of speech he wants to protect, it’s worth questioning what kind of public square he envisions.

Musk takes a technocratic approach to the social issues that emerge from our use of online communication tools. It implies free access to technology absolves “free speech” of its cultural and social context, and makes it easily and readily available to everyone.

This is often not the case. That’s why we need content moderation and protections for the vulnerable and marginalised.

The other question is whether we want billionaires to have a direct influence on our public squares. If so, how do we ensure transparency, and that users’ interests are being upheld?

In less bombastic reportage of the takeover, Musk this week directed Twitter to find more than US$1 billion in annual infrastructure cost savings, which will allegedly occur through cuts to cloud services and server space. These cuts could put Twitter at risk of going down during high-traffic periods, such as around election times.

This might be where Musk’s digital town square vision fails. If Twitter is to resemble such a space, the infrastructure that supports it must hold up at the most crucial moments.

Where to go if you’re sick of Twitter?

While there’s so far no indication of a mass Twitter exodus, a number of users are flocking elsewhere. Shortly after Musk acquired Twitter, #TwitterMigration began trending. In the week since, micro-blogging platform Mastodon has reportedly gained tens of thousands of followers.

Mastodon is made up of independent, user-managed servers. Each server is owned, operated and moderated by its community and can also be made private. The downside is servers cost money to run and if a server is no longer running, all the content may be lost.

Twitter defectors have also moved to sites such as Reddit, Tumblr, CounterSocial, LinkedIn and Discord.

Of course, many will be waiting to see what Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey comes up with. While Dorsey retains a stake in Twitter, he has launched a decentralised social media network, Bluesky Social, which is now in beta testing.

Bluesky aims to provide an open social network protocol. This means it would allow for multiple social media networks to interact with one another through an open standard.

If this experiment is successful, it would be more than a competitor for Twitter. It would mean users could easily switch services and take their content with them to other providers.

It would be a totally new user-focused model for social networking. And it might force traditional platforms to rethink their current data harvesting and targeted advertising practices. That might just be a platform takeover worth waiting for.

Diana Bossio, Associate Professor, Media and Communications, Swinburne University of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Musk even changed his Twitter profile to ‘Chief Twit’

‘Entering Twitter HQ – let that sink in!’ he cheekily tweeted with the video.

After a court gave him till Friday to close his April agreement to acquire the social media giant, neither Musk nor Twitter gave any information regarding the $44 billion takeover deal.

Musk has been on the fence over this acquisition. After announcing to acquire of the company with a $54.20 per share bid, Musk kept the deal on hold as he wanted Twitter to remove all the bot accounts from the platform.

Twitter agreed to give the command to Musk after some initial resistance. Musk then decided to pull out of the deal, citing Twitter’s inability to

Twitter then sued the world’s richest man and the case was about to start in an American court.

Earlier this month, Musk again gave signals that he was interested in the acquisition, and many thought it would be the end to the lawsuit by Twitter.

According to a Reuters report, Musk notified his co-investors, including institutions such as Sequoia Capital, Binance, Qatar Investment Authority, to close the deal by Friday.

Twitter’s stock was up about 1% at $53.31, or about $1 less than Musk’s offer price, over the development.