On Tweeting

When Twitter first came out, it was a novelty that seemed to have no purpose other than to self-expose—but then the celebrities got into it (self-exposing being their lifeblood) and from that beginning it has morphed into any number of markets and functions until it has become an integral part of our global digital nervous system. All well and good.

What is not well, and what is not good, is the impact the dark side of the Twitterverse is having on mental health, societal divisions, corporate responsibility, and political accountability. The problem is that the medium is designed to present claims without evidence. For much in life, this is just fine, but for anything that is truly material to human welfare, it is not. When anyone can make any claim at any time, regardless of whether it is true or not, and that claim can damage another person’s reputation or wellbeing, we are in dangerous waters indeed. But that is the status quo, and we need to find some way to address it.

So where does that leave us? Well, we could start by getting clear about what we mean by free speech. Free speech is critical to democratic government, but as we all know, it is does not apply when someone chooses to yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. The problem we face is that the digital enclaves within which we live and breathe are becoming more and more like crowded theaters. Others might call them echo chambers, but regardless of the term, the result is that an exchange of claims can escalate through a series of positive feedback loops with no dampening negative feedback to control them. The louder things get, the crazier they get, until someone or some group acts out, sometimes horrifically, and then what? We stand helplessly by, like some unarmed policeman shouting “Stop! Stop! Or I will yell Stop again!”

To be sure, my concern here is not really about Twitter. It is about social media in general and its susceptibility to abuse, and now even worse, state-sponsored efforts to destabilize other societies. That genie is out of the bottle, and regulatory bodies around the world will be doing their best to stuff it back in. I don’t have a lot of confidence in what they can actually accomplish, but I agree they have to try.

In the meantime, on a personal basis, we need to reassert the value of critical thinking. This is the discipline of testing claims against evidence to determine if they are truly warranted. It is an inherently social process, with plenty of room for a wide divergence of opinions as long as the rules of the game are being observed. It requires, however, that we listen openly, particularly at times when we are absolutely certain we know what the other person is about to say. It requires that we empathize, especially when we disagree with the point being made.  But most importantly, it requires that we continue to ask both others and ourselves, what makes you think that? Free speech does not have to be accountable, but it certainly needs to be. And we need to make ourselves part of the fabric that makes it so.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Follow Geoff on LinkedIn | Geoffrey Moore Mailing List

_________________________________________________________________________

Geoffrey Moore | Zone to Win | Geoffrey Moore Twitter | Geoffrey Moore YouTube