elpais.com
Musk's X fuels concerns, drives users to alternative platforms
Elon Musk's management of X (formerly Twitter) is fueling concerns about misinformation, political interference, and the platform's role in spreading far-right content, prompting institutions and users to seek alternatives such as Bluesky and Mastodon.
- What are the immediate consequences of Elon Musk's actions on X, and how are they impacting public perception and institutional trust?
- Elon Musk's erratic behavior and actions on X (formerly Twitter) are causing concern. He recently urged users for more "positive" content, contradicting his previous approach and his platform is increasingly used to spread misinformation, including unfounded accusations against Keir Starmer and interference in elections like promoting an interview with a leader from Germany's far-right party. This has led to many abandoning the platform.
- What is the likely future of alternative social media platforms in light of the issues with X, and what factors will determine their success in attracting users and institutions?
- The exodus from X is creating an opportunity for alternative platforms like Bluesky and Mastodon to gain traction, particularly in Spain. The example of users discussing the Vienna New Year's Concert shows the potential for these platforms to recreate the community aspect of pre-Musk Twitter. The upcoming Eurovision Song Contest will be a crucial test for these alternatives, demonstrating their capacity to compete with X's established user base.
- How does Elon Musk's use of X to disseminate misinformation and interfere in elections compare to his previous behavior in the US, and what are the broader implications for political discourse?
- Musk's actions on X reflect a broader pattern of using social media to promote far-right content and influence political outcomes, similar to his approach in the US. This has created a dilemma for public institutions that remain on the platform, raising questions about neutrality and complicity. The continued presence of essential public services on X, despite its political slant, highlights institutional inertia and the challenge of migrating to alternative platforms.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames Elon Musk and X negatively from the outset. The headline (if there were one) would likely emphasize Musk's flaws and X's role in spreading misinformation. The tone is highly critical and accusatory throughout, shaping the reader's perception of Musk and X before presenting any counterarguments. The author uses strong, emotionally charged language to create this negative framing.
Language Bias
The author uses loaded language such as "ultraderechista" (far-right), "falsedades" (falsehoods), and "trolls" to describe Musk, his actions, and the content on X. These terms are strongly negative and lack neutrality. More neutral alternatives could be used, such as 'right-wing,' 'inaccurate information,' and 'disruptive users.' The repeated use of negative and emotional language reinforces a biased perspective.
Bias by Omission
The analysis focuses heavily on Elon Musk's behavior and the right-wing content on X, but omits discussion of potential counterarguments or positive aspects of the platform. It doesn't explore the perspectives of users who find X valuable for specific reasons, beyond a brief mention of institutional inertia. The article also neglects to mention any efforts by X to counter the spread of misinformation or to promote more balanced content.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between staying on X and being complicit with its owner's views. It oversimplifies the reasons why people use social media platforms, neglecting other factors like networking, convenience, and access to specific information. The choice is framed as binary: either abandon X completely or be complicit. This ignores the nuances of individual user motivations and the possibility of critical engagement within the platform.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights how Elon Musk's ownership of X (formerly Twitter) has led to the platform being used to spread misinformation and interfere in elections. This undermines trust in institutions and the democratic process, negatively impacting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The spread of false information, such as accusations against Keir Starmer, erodes public trust and fuels polarization. The platform's facilitation of extremist content further destabilizes the social and political climate.