← Back to context

Comment by jampekka

5 months ago

> By now it's pretty clear that the network is actively driving discourse in one specific direction.

Research is exactly about not just taking a look and declaring something "pretty clear". Also what "a direction" is not clear, or the dynamics of what affects the direction etc.

It’s pretty clear.

There were a few shifts that happened:

1. Musk bought twitter

2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser.

3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc.

4. Twitter made changes under Musk that compensated large accounts based on the number of views or engagements.

Effectively a rev share for ad spend

5. Because Musk can massively amplify content and has a fragile ego, aligning yourself with Musk’s pet issues directly affects income for influencers. Accounts in the other direction can be demonetized and deprioritized on feeds.

This has led to large accounts, in the run up to the election, being very vocally trump even when they’ve had publicly leftist leanings in the past. It wasn’t a shift in policy positions. It was a shift to ragebait and memes that were more likely to get Elon’s attention and retweets.

So it is both pretty clear and a result of active decisions in one specific direction. We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation.

  • > We don’t need a multi-year quintuple blind study by esteemed Ivy League research fellows to do the basic observation and deduction of the situation.

    Of course not, they're going to provide more precise data and facts. Perhaps many don't need the data to arrive at conclusions the data will point to but that does not obviate the utility of the research. Really, if you think their data will point to these conclusions, one would think you'd be that much more interested to see that the research is being conducted.

  • > Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right.

    This is such a weird take. While I don't disagree about Musk's ego, it should be quite obvious that there's something else at play here, considering an unhinged convicted criminal won the popular vote and became a president. I've personally seen multiple people go through the same shift to the right as Musk. Are they all losers? Or maybe, just maybe, some of the more insane policies of the current American left have pushed them there?

    • Sure, there's definitely a chance that some people reacted to the pendulum swing to the left; highlighted by (among many things?) Obama's election and marriage equality being passed.

      But I think that more people were affected by these things:

      The continued lack of funds allocated to education resulting in a terrible lack of critical thinking

      The constant bombardment of social media

      The influence of russia et al on social media

      The gaming of recommendation algorithms by the far-right resulting in the pipeline to hatred

      The crisis of masculinity where today's men don't feel they fill the same roles as their grandfathers, leading some to fall down the pipeline to hate

      The gerrymandering of districts

      Election rolls/registers being purged of historically left leaning people

      USA supreme court rulings like Citizens United

      Congress being so utterly out of touch with average Americans

      And congress' age issue

      Of course, there's many more points that people could argue about all day, and I don't think we're going to find out any real reasons here on HN. Maybe in 100 years time, if there's anyone left, the historians will be able to find the root issues.

      1 reply →

    • Sorry maybe that wasn’t clear: i think musk swung right because he wanted to be seen as Ironman and instead was mocked for being a loser.

      Twitter can be mercilous. Musk wants so badly to be liked, didn’t get it (in part because it was so obvious), and went full Ben Shapiro aggrieved middle schooler.

    • Why is left always blamed for what hard right and right does? These people were right wing, fascist leaning and moderate right just did not liked when someone said that out loud. Moderate right would always go to their defense, frequently ignoring what those people do and say.

      Left complains and comments about Musk, republicans and conservatives turned out to be entirely right. They were called paranoid and unfair.

      Perhaps, left reacted to what right does, plans to do and was entirely correct. Perhaps, what happens now is the fault of moderate right and center who fed these people, celebrated these people, voted for these people and defended these people.

      2 replies →

  • I'm partial to believing Musk's control and personal beliefs have been a factor in changes in Xitter discourse. But what would be effective ways for convincing others? Also I like to think I verify my beliefs with systematic analysis.

    Furthermore, these points don't give any analysis of how this change has evolved, exactly how the messaging has changed, what's been the timeline etc.

    Not checking your assumptions with data, and furher rejecting attempts to do this, is what I think is a large part driving what's happening. But for sure I'd like a reality check for my thinking.

  • Imo, Musk bought twitter for political reasons and was hard right leaning long before. Just as quite a few people correctly guessed at the time. Musk was full of petty grievances long before buying twitter too, he had track record of being aggressive when meeting opposition long before and his companies had track record of treating certain groups more badly then others.

    The way Musk acted before buying twitter, insulting and mocking people makes him someone who has no business to complain when they respond in kind after he fails. So, Musk buys twitter for political reasons, mocking employees, owners and those he considers to be on the left. He claims to make it more performant, fails, get mocked back.

    It is getting tiresone. Musk had few minor left leaning opinions and tons of right wing ones. Notable, his got given right to control everything, be no subject to the law since he is rich and succesful in business. His few left opinions failed to made him admired on the left.

  • > 2. Musk, despite being the wealthiest person on earth and running companies that are genuinely fascinating, has nonetheless—against overwhelming odds—been considered a loser.

    I've never heard or seen that. Musk is a public figure and subject to much criticism, but so are all public figures and Musk actively provokes it (that is, Musk trolls for it).

    > 3. Because of (2) and his fragile ego (part of the reason he was widely considered a loser in the pre-Musk dominant circles) he went hard to the right. Petty grievances, anti-free speech, “burn it down”, etc.

    Lots of wealthy SV people have gone hard right; they don't all have relatively fragile egos. Musk is following the herd.

    It's pardoxical that people think Musk, Zuckerberg, etc. are geniuses when they both follow the herd and have chosen a herd that is running off a cliff. They did not invent this ideology (who did?).