Elon Musk and Twitter – WSJ

As you might have guessed, the prospect of a restoration of common sense is not being uniformly welcomed by those who work in corporate advertising but prefer to view themselves as activists for social change.

Patience Haggin and Suzanne Vranica report:

Elon Musk is expected to complete a takeover of Twitter Inc. this week, barring a last-minute snag. Madison Avenue isn’t sold on the deal.

Advertisers are concerned about the billionaire’s plans to soften content moderation and what they say are potential conflicts of interest in auto advertising, given that he is chief executive of Tesla Inc., say people familiar with the situation.

Mr. Musk said this spring that as owner of Twitter he would reinstate former President

Donald Trump’s

account, which the platform suspended indefinitely after linking Mr. Trump’s comments to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. That would be a red line for some brands, said Kieley Taylor, global head of partnerships at GroupM, a leading ad-buying agency that represents blue-chip brands.

About a dozen of GroupM’s clients, which own an array of well-known consumer brands, have told the agency to pause all their ads on Twitter if Mr. Trump’s account is reinstated, Ms. Taylor said. Others are in wait-and-see mode. Ms. Taylor said she expects to hear from many more clients if Mr. Trump’s account returns.

The concern that Mr. Musk might favor his car brand over others is reasonable and will need to be addressed by Twitter to attract auto advertising. Demands for political censorship are not reasonable and today Mr. Musk sends a bracing message attached to a tweet saying:

Dear Twitter Advertisers

Here’s Mr. Musk’s message in toto:

I wanted to reach out personally to share my motivation in acquiring Twitter. There has been much speculation about why I bought Twitter and what I think about advertising. Most of it has been wrong.

The reason I acquired Twitter is because it is important to the future of civilization to have a common digital town square, where a wide range of beliefs can be debated in a healthy manner, without resorting to violence. There is currently great danger that social media will splinter into far right wing and far left wing echo chambers that generate more hate and divide our society.

In the relentless pursuit of clicks, much of traditional media has fueled and catered to those polarized extremes, as they believe that is what brings in the money, but, in doing so, the opportunity for dialogue is lost.

That is why I bought Twitter. I didn’t do it because it would be easy. I didn’t do it to make more money. I did it to try to help humanity, whom I love. And I do so with humility, recognizing that failure in pursuing this goal, despite our best efforts, is a very real possibility.

That said, Twitter obviously cannot become a free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences! In addition to adhering to the laws of the land, our platform must be warm and welcoming to all, where you can choose your desired experience according to your preferences, just as you can choose, for example, to see movies or play video games ranging from all ages to mature.

I also very much believe that advertising, when done right, can delight, entertain and inform you; it can show you a service or product or medical treatment that you never knew existed, but is right for you. For this to be true, it is essential to show Twitter users advertising that is as relevant as possible to their needs. Low relevancy ads are spam, but highly relevant ads are actually content!

Fundamentally, Twitter aspires to be the most respected advertising platform in the world that strengthens your brand and grows your enterprise. To everyone who has partnered with us, I thank you. Let us build something extraordinary together.

Some readers may choke on that line about seeking to serve humanity. Mr. Musk didn’t become the world’s richest man by ignoring opportunities to build wealth. But he’s taking an unnecessary risk here. As a business Twitter is not a leader in the social media industry and just like all the others it may struggle to compete in the rapidly growing shadow of Emperor TikTok. In any case, if Mr. Musk can end up growing his wealth by figuring out how to expand free speech while also giving consumers new tools to shield themselves and their families from content to which they object, his additional riches will be well earned.

Achieving that content balance between liberty and order is an enormous task and if he can pull it off the benefits for our public discourse and our society will be much greater. It’s possible that in years to come we may look back at today’s tweeted declaration as a turning point toward a healthier media culture. It’s also possible that a fast-changing tech industry will make Twitter the answer to a trivia question in the not-too-distant future.

Whether Mr. Musk’s Twitter succeeds, his approach to managing a social media platform deserves applause. Right away, consumers can help by using their purchasing decisions to punish any corporate wokesters who refuse to advertise on platforms that don’t practice viewpoint discrimination.

As an act of political hygiene, it would also be helpful for Mr. Musk to make public any communications from government officials that encouraged Twitter’s previous abuses in censorship.

***

What Is Biden Doing Without Experts?
This column is often skeptical of the claims of credentialed experts who give allegedly technical advice supporting leftist political narratives. But it seems that the Biden administration is now so eager to regulate that it doesn’t even bother pretending that its prescriptions for bigger government are coming from experts in a relevant field.

Wayne Crews

of the Competitive Enterprise Institute is out this week with his annual “10,000 Commandments” guide to the massive federal regulatory state. In an op-ed in The Hill with Ryan Young, Mr. Crews writes:

Most of us face a choice: do a few things reasonably well or many things poorly. The same goes for federal regulators. And that’s why each regulatory agency was created with a focus — on environmental quality, education goals, health policy, and so on. But now the Biden administration has upended that focus, directing agencies to take a ”whole-of-government” approach to make every policy comply with goals on climate change and social justice — regardless of the relevance or downsides… the whole-of-government approach sets regulators up for failure. It distracts agencies from their missions and piles on additional duties outside of their expertise.

The people who have to live under such rules are surely also set up for failure.

What would we do without Mr. Biden’s non-experts?

***

James Freeman is the co-author of “The Cost: Trump, China and American Revival.”

***

Follow James Freeman on Twitter.

Subscribe to the Best of the Web email.

To suggest items, please email best@wsj.com.

(Lisa Rossi helps compile Best of the Web.)