By Donald Bramer
Whatever your level of knowing about economics is, it is a truth that everyone in America and the world is raising this critical question: what is the purpose of billionaire Elon Musk buying Twitter? No other mega business deal has raised that degree of controversy before. The answer could be simple and it could be summed up in the fact that it is another huge deal, and it is becoming a debate and a very important topic because Elon Musk's purchase of the giant social media platform Twitter can impact negatively of positively the freedom of speech all over the world.
The very basic way of thinking about it is to view Elon Musk as a very pragmatic but also an ideological person. He's someone that is not afraid to say the old phrase, put your money where your mouth is. He still says he's a Democrat, and he still says he supports President Obama. What he says he doesn't support is this control of free speech, this control of how we're allowed to think what we're made to think. He is the type of person who has the ability and certainly the resources to do this. People all over the world hope and like to think that he did this for the right reason that everyone should have the ability to voice their opinion. People will not disagree that's the one thing that's awesome about America.
Yet, does the logic of free speech depend on the ownership of Twitter?
The definition of free speech is the ability to have your opinion. Personally, I should be able to have mine. Humans should be able to discuss it like adults and not get mad and pick up this log and throw it at you. In any average conversation one should be able to say, you know, I respect your opinion, you respect mine. It is common sense, just because we have a difference of opinion does not mean we have to hate each other. Recently, our conversations have gotten away from that. This is due to the fact that the social media had enabled the individual to hide behind a keyboard. And you can be anybody you want to be, you can create fake profiles. So, it gives people something to hide behind. For sure, this is bad, because there's no accountability. If it is OK to have a difference of opinion, the identity of the persons disagreeing should be known to each other.
Fears are mounting that Musk will stifle free speech. However, we all hope that Elon Musk will deal with it with no bias, and that he keeps his promise to respect the freedom of speech. This what he said in the past. Some people have raised this question: is it a coincidence when we have at the same time or around a week after he purchased Twitter a board of misleading information created or established by identity Biden? Perhaps, It's no coincidence at all. We know what it looks like? It looks like fear. For several years leading up to this, America has had a group of people who only wanted to be one narrative. The giant computer firms of Big Tech have done this in the past. They work this way, if you disagree with me, then we block you, we banned you, we turned you off. If a citizen cannot use social media to express his or her opinion, then he or she is going to rely on the government to do that. Without expressing any partisan partiality, I think right now the Democrats are forgetting about the fact that the creation of an official office of disinformation forces the move to change it if there is another party in power.
Musing over its long-term consequences, it sounds like a throwback to what the British writer George Orwell had written about. Again, this prospect of Twitter muzzling opinions is very Orwellian. And if we ever go back to a lot of the early books in 1984, where it talks about controlling information, this doesn't end well. It does not ever end well. It doesn't in any book in any country that you've ever seen in the past. Mr. Musk you are taking away the right of the First Amendment, and you've tried to control what people are allowed to think. This never works out in your favor. I'm truly optimistic that when the Republicans take the majority back in November, they'll look at this office of disinformation, and defund it. Because what people don't realise is that Congress controls the purse strings. It will have no budget.
On the other hand, Qatar is at the heart of Musk’s Twitter deal investing $375 million. And Qatar is like any Arab country, is known for its suppression of free speech. Fearfully, Qatar can manage Twitter through Musk buying it.
This is ironic. Where does the priorities lie? China has many investments in the U.S. Nevertheless, they don't hold the same principles in their own home country. So maybe there's an opportunity for Qatar to advance itself socially and politically the way China does through its overseas investments. Only time will tell how Qatar will impact Twitter. Certainly they are looking to increase their own investment portfolio.
At some point, Qatar may try to put limitations on Twitter especially in their own nation. This adds to the already limitations on Twitter across the globe, and in Russia, in China. Twitter is an economic service that can make more censorship, and we can see more of this narrowness. Elon must honor his promise of freedom of speech across the world. The future of Twitter depends on Musk not giving up his majority shareholder.
Another probable scenario for the future of Twitter is Iran gaining influence of it through Qatar. Possibly, Iran will have a control on this big platform. But what kind of investment they will make?
At least, they can be part of it. It could be a big part of them. For the past few years, while Twitter has been banning President Trump, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and others they've allowed the Taliban to have it as an access to them. Twitter has allowed the what we deem as terrorists to continue to have a platform. Twitter owners have even allowed the leadership of ISIS to have a platform on Twitter. Radically, they ban a president, and a TV producer, because you don't like his opinion. What is the balance? The followers of conservatives and Republicans are increasing lately. Their base is increasing. Everyone should have a fair shot, whether you agree or disagree.
The support of the conservative and Republican base has been swelling because there is no limit on what they say. There is not a lock on how information can spread. If anything were in, like a rival company to Twitter, this will be a change that will prove beneficial. It will also open the doors for other social media platforms. Competition is good in every world. Competition makes us better. And sometimes that's what we need.
There are some concerns in the Middle East that Musk could project few biased attitudes toward certain countries and not others. He will alienate many followers this way, Most likely, Twitter as an operation will gradually squeeze him out. Hence, the question is how political Elon Musk is to keep a solid political base in order not to lose his business.
In conclusion, Elon Musk is one of the most screwed business people. I don't see him as a person who willingly gives up control. I also don't see him as anyone who gives up his principles. What's astounding about him as he has failed, so many times, is that he's gone bankrupt so many times, but he's never let that stop him. He's never fallen down and not gotten back up. So I think that while he did a smart business move of looking for investors to raise capital, what he did is that he stuck to his principles. He said he was going to purchase something, and he did it. And I think he has his ideology, the ideology that he'll stick to. He had done that with Tesla, and everything else. I mean, the thing about Elon Musk is, it's a great example of how the current Biden Administration doesn't even really accept him or acknowledge him. But he is still pushing hard his business concepts. A few weeks ago, they had a huge ceremony at the White House for the future electric car and he was not invited. He was not present at the summit for green energy either.