We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Elon Musk to buy Twitter: will misinformation thrive?
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, discusses the political impact of Elon Musk's plan to buyTwitter.
Why will Elon Musk be in a political hotspot if he buys Twitter?
The announcement that Twitter has agreed to be acquired by billionaire Elon Musk has set both the social media site and Washington political analysis ablaze. Liberals and conservatives both agree that Twitter is an essential town square, an important tool for political communication and outreach.
But liberals are concerned about policing hate speech and abuse, as well as misinformation on the platform, things they have criticized Twitter for in the past, while conservatives have criticized what they see as Twitter's overly aggressive content moderation policies that's resulted in the removal of several prominent conservative figures, including former President Trump from the platform, but has also resulted in the censorship of discussion around issues like the efficacy of mask mandates and stopping the spread of coronavirus, the potential origins of the pandemic in a Wuhan laboratory, and discussion about the contents of the laptop stolen from current President Biden's son. Musk has promised to be a free speech absolutist suggesting he will reinstate many of the banned accounts and not censor freewheeling speech about controversial topics online.
But one thing to watch is that Musk's approach is likely to create massive regulatory challenges for both Musk and the website, particularly in Europe, which has much stricter speech codes than the United States, requiring content moderation and banning things like hate speech. The EU just recently passed a law that would censor and fine companies that do not comply, and several high-ranking EU officials have already sent warnings to Musk that he must moderate illegal and harmful content online. Musk has developed a reputation as being an aggressive disruptor of the status quo in Washington, breaking into industries, such as space launch and broadband deployment, and he has also a long history of flouting US regulators, leading to sanctions from securities regulators, as well as admonishment from transportation safety and labor regulators in Washington, and this is unlikely to stop.
For his part, President Trump has said he doesn't want to get back on Twitter, but it seems likely that if Twitter lifts its ban on his account, the platform and the fundraising opportunities will be too great for him to ignore. Much like how Trump's tweets are too difficult for political journalists to ignore, setting up a stage for a return to the Trump-dominated political discourse that existed in the United States from 2015 until he was banned from Twitter in early 2021.
- Twitter smells of Musk - GZERO Media ›
- What We're Watching: Musk irks China, Abbas meets Gantz in Israel ... ›
- A “techlash” is coming this year - GZERO Media ›
- US pushes back on EU's proposed laws impacting US tech ... ›
- US politics are prone to misinformation, says former Danish PM - GZERO Media ›
- Was Elon Musk right about Twitter's bots? - GZERO Media ›
- How social media harms democracy - GZERO Media ›
- Elon Musk wants a way out of Twitter - GZERO Media ›
US pushes back on EU's proposed laws impacting US tech companies
Marietje Schaake, International Policy Director at Stanford's Cyber Policy Center, Eurasia Group senior advisor and former MEP, discusses trends in big tech, privacy protection and cyberspace:
What are the EU's digital gatekeeper rules, and why does the US want them changed?
Now, the EU is working on a series of legislative proposals, for example, to ensure risk mitigation around the use of AI, or the protection of fundamental rights, but also to make sure that there is fairness and competition in the digital economy. And the Digital Services Act still under negotiation between the European Commission, member state governments, and the European Parliament, seeks to impose proactive obligations on large gatekeeper tech companies, to basically extend antitrust principles and protect smaller players.
And now at the eleventh hour, the Biden administration through Commerce Secretary, Raimondo, but also a number of senators, is voicing its concern. The political leaders worry that the EU rules would discriminate unfairly against American tech companies and really single them out. But what's easily overlooked in their statements is that US-based tech companies have grown exceptionally large, and that a law that wishes to put specific obligations on the largest companies would inevitably include many American companies.
So you might think of the situation we find ourselves in as the consequence of their success. But besides that, concerns about the outsized power of a handful of monopolists is not unique to Europe. Americans also worry about harms caused by competition that is lacking or harms to society, for example, democracy or the protection of minorities. So it may be better for the US political leaders to prioritize focusing on those voices, instead of writing papers to Europeans that have nearly finished their years long deliberations.
- Europe and the US can't agree on how to regulate Big Tech ... ›
- Big Tech's big challenge to the global order - GZERO Media ›
- The technopolar world: A new dimension of geopolitics — Kevin ... ›
- A “techlash” is coming this year - GZERO Media ›
- EU's proposed DSA and DMA laws would broadly regulate digital ... ›
- Elon Musk to buy Twitter: will misinformation thrive? - GZERO Media ›
What We’re Watching: Peruvian presidential runoff, EU push to tax multinationals, Japan’s post-Olympics election
Peru's divisive choice: Peruvians head to the polls on Sunday to choose between two deeply polarizing candidates in the presidential runoff election. One is Pedro Castillo, a far-left yet socially conservative union leader and teacher. Castillo wants to rewrite the constitution to curb the power of the business elite and distribute more mining wealth to social programs. The other is rightwing firebrand Keiko Fujimori, who says she would continue the free-market policies championed by her strongman father in the 1990s. Fujimori says the country needs a demodura ("hard democracy"), a somewhat milder version of the dictablanda ("soft dictatorship") her dad once led. Castillo is beloved by rural Peruvians and anti-establishment urban voters, but his embrace of Marxism and Venezuela may alienate moderates. Fujimori, for her part, is backed by big business, but very unpopular outside her base, and negatively associated with her father's authoritarian rule and corruption — not to mention her own multiple legal troubles. Castillo is currently leading in the polls, but Fujimori has a shot at victory if voter turnout is lower than expected.
EU's new law to tax multinationals: After five years of negotiations, the EU Parliament has reached an agreement on tax guidelines for multinational corporations operating within the 27-member bloc. Under the new law, American behemoths like Apple, Amazon, and Google that make more than $916 million annually in two consecutive years will have to report their income, taxes, and number of employees across all EU countries, as well as in certain non-EU states designated on a tax-haven "blacklist," like the Cayman Islands. For years, countries like France have been calling for stricter tax rules for large corporations — particularly Big Tech firms — that flood EU markets yet pay scarce taxes back to their governments. While this is a big development, the text of the law will now have to go through the labyrinthine Brussels bureaucracy, and ultimately get unanimous consent by all 27 EU member states. Given that EU countries like Ireland and the Netherlands have greatly benefited from operating as tax havens for multinationals to stash their profits, Brussels will need to engage in lots of bargaining to get the law through. Meanwhile, the Biden administration has been pushing hard for a global minimum tax. If the EU gets this done, it will surely push things in that direction.
Japan's snap election: Japan's Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga is planning to call a snap election after the Tokyo Olympics, set to begin next month. Suga was initially popular when he took over from his predecessor Shinzo Abe last summer, but his approval ratings have rapidly declined in recent weeks due to his insistence on holding the Olympics, despite widespread opposition amongst Japanese who fear the games will give rise to new COVID outbreaks. Japan's sluggish vaccine rollout has also hurt the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, which is now worried about losing its majority for the first time in almost a decade. And there's reason to be concerned: less than two months ago, the LDP lost all three special elections to fill parliamentary seats — seats that were vacated by LDP members implicated in bribery scandals at a time when the Japanese people are becoming increasingly frustrated with government corruption. Suga will now have to pull out all the stops — perhaps including a new stimulus package to revive Japan's pandemic-battered economy — if he wants to stay in power.
US joins in call to regulate Big Tech; EU proposes AI tech regulation
Get insights on the latest news about emerging trends in cyberspace from Marietje Schaake, International Policy Director at Stanford University's Cyber Policy Center and former European Parliamentarian:
This week we talk about one of my favorite topics, regulation. Laws are often framed as a barrier to innovation and not always recognized as a key enabler of freedoms and the protection of rights. But what's more is that regulation is a process, and one that can have tons of different outcomes. So, being in favor or against regulation doesn't mean anything. Except that those who oppose any changes are apparently benefiting from the status quo.
Is the world at a tipping point when it comes to regulating big tech?
And I would say absolutely. The outsized power of big tech is recognized more broadly because the harms are so blatantly clear. Harms to democracy, public health, but also to fairness in the economy are all related to the outsized power of unaccountable and under-regulated big tech. Now, what's significant is that this debate has finally hit home in the United States after it was already recognized as a problem in many other parts of the world.
How does the EU's proposed regulation on AI technology differ from other countries, like China and the US?
Well, the brand-new EU AI regulation proposed this week takes a values, but also a risk-based approach, and essentially is the first continent to move with a comprehensive strategy for ensuring that AI does not cause death, or ends due process, destroys privacy, or creates unprecedented powerful corporate manipulators. So, all eyes are now out for what the European Parliament and the governments of EU member states will say in response to this proposal by the European Commission. Because together these three institutions will negotiate and ultimately vote before we can actually speak of a law that has entered into effect.