The past two weeks have been a lesson of contrasts for X, the platform previously known as Twitter. In the Western Hemisphere, X is serving as the platform of heroes, helping the repressed democratic opposition of Venezuela organize protests and expose the electoral fraud of a dictatorship clinging to power. On the other side of the Atlantic, it is the villain, assisting racists in the U.K. to spread disinformation and organize violent mobs.
In response, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has implemented a ban on the platform, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is suggesting that X is potentially legally liable for the damage caused by the disinformation it spreads. The two reactions do not have the same motives or justifications, but their similarities should drive a new debate about the use and abuse of these platforms.
The questions of whether social media technology is good, bad or neutral, and how it should be regulated have been around since platforms like Twitter and Facebook were first launched in the mid-2000s. But this round of discussion is different for at least two reasons. First, after nearly two decades of experience with social media and the interconnectivity it generates, governments, populations and bad actors worldwide are adapting their online tactics in more refined ways. Second, X’s new owner, Elon Musk, has personally engaged in the discussions on the platform regarding both Venezuela and the U.K., adding his own views to the controversies in ways that complicate the debate over the platform’s various uses.