Anyhoo… let’s just say the next few paragraphs are known as predictions In May at a conference, Elon Musk said he was against the idea of ”perma” bans. “I think it was wrong to ban Donald Trump, I think it was wrong,” Musk said. “I would reverse the life ban. But my view, and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this view, that we should not have permanent bans.” A few weeks before that, he said he hoped “even my worst critics would stay on Twitter, because that’s what freedom of speech is all about.” He also said that when he spoke of restoring free speech on Twitter, he meant “what fits within the law” saying he was “against censorship that goes far beyond the law”. And, just as a side note (by which I mean, more foreshadowing) parody has been found to be protected by the 1st Amendment, making it very “lawful”. And, in an important case, the wonderful judge, Pierre Leval, pointed out that parody is still protected by the 1st Amendment, even if some people are fooled by it. In that case, one of the claims was that a parody made by New York Magazine did not qualify as a parody. But Judge Leval points out that this does not matter: Although New York’s position would probably be stronger if its joke were clearer, the vagueness of its joke does not deprive it of First Amendment support. First Amendment protections don’t just apply to those who speak plainly, whose jokes are funny, and whose parodies succeed. Oh, and one more thing: after taking over Twitter, Musk declared that “comedy is now legal on Twitter.” Okay. Enough with the announcements. On Sunday afternoon, Musk decided that impersonation would immediately lead to a permban. Which says: Going forward, anyone who engages in impersonation on Twitter without clearly identifying the “spoof” will be permanently suspended Of course, as basically everyone noticed, the “impersonator” accounts that started getting suspended seemed to be people making fun of Elon Musk. Most notably, comedian Kathy Griffin changed her name to Elon Musk and mocked him. Some others had done something similar. So, just a week into ownership, Musk reverted to “all legal free speech,” no permaban, and hoping his detractors will stay on Twitter all in one shot. It’s almost impressive. And, yes, you can (and I’m sure some very eager people will in our comments) argue that user impersonation is potentially problematic. Musk tried to clarify that he was talking about accounts with checkmarks (what used to be verified accounts, but under Musk’s leadership now meant “willing to pay $8/month”). And, yes, when the checkmarks were about verified identity, I could see how it would be problematic for someone to impersonate someone else. However, this is less true in the “pay for checkmark without verification” setting. But the bottom line is that this is exactly what many of us have been trying to tell Musk since March. That moderation issues are not about “free speech.” It’s something else entirely. I don’t begrudge Musk trying to actually address potential issues that might arise with impersonation. But… if he had even an ounce of self-reflection, he might realize that all these hypocritical moves he’s making suggest that maybe, just maybe, Twitter and all the employees he fired actually had decent (or, shall we say, very, very stable ) understand what free speech really means and how to manage a platform like Twitter. And while I was really hoping that he might secretly understand all of this and just be there for his fans, it really seems like Musk is relentlessly rushing through the learning curve of content moderation and making the same moves as everyone else before him. It’s easy to declare “free speech for all” until suddenly all hell breaks loose and people are mocking you left and right. Anyway, the comedy remains legitimate, and in a way, this is all very, very funny.
Filed Under: content moderation, elon musk, free speech, impersonation, jokes, parody, permanent blocks Companies: twitter
