Elon Musk recently announced new changes to the monetization policy on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. This update could have significant ramifications for users who benefit from the ad revenue-sharing program Musk instituted earlier this year.
Under this update, any posts corrected by the Community Notes feature will become ineligible for revenue sharing. The objective is to “maximize the incentive for accuracy over sensationalism,” according to a post he wrote on X.
Making a slight change to creator monetization:
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 29, 2023
Any posts that are corrected by @CommunityNotes become ineligible for revenue share.
The idea is to maximize the incentive for accuracy over sensationalism.
Worth “noting” that any attempts to weaponize @CommunityNotes to demonetize people will be immediately obvious, because all code and data is open source
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 29, 2023
One of the most pressing concerns that arose when X rolled out the ad revenue sharing program is that it would be abused by users who are not concerned with posting truthful information. Many surmised that it would only encourage users on the platform to write sensational and divisive posts that contained false information intended to rile people up for clicks. This has come to pass in some ways, but from where I sit, it has not yet become as problematic as many feared.
Nevertheless, the move was met with varied opinions. Some argued that it is a great way to ensure people get accurate information on the platform, while others suggested that it might lead to more censorship and other issues. In this piece, I’ll review this new policy’s pros and cons.
On the positive side, the most glaring benefit is the ability to combat misinformation and disinformation. I know those terms have become buzzwords for authoritarians on the left, which can be translated to: Any opinion, argument, or fact contradicting narratives progressives put forth is by definition misinformation. But the fact remains: There is a lot of fake news on X.
Under this new system, posts containing misinformation would not necessarily be removed. The Community Notes written by users granted the ability to use the feature would simply appear under the post – so it doesn’t exactly constitute censorship. However, it would mean that the one posting the falsehoods would not be able to earn an income from it. “People shouldn’t profit from misinformation,” one user wrote. The financial blow might deter bad actors from spreading fake information for the purpose of getting more money through engagement.
Moreover, if X is going to stay alive, Musk and other stakeholders have a vested interest in making sure the platform is not being abused by grifters lying to make some quick bucks. Musk clarified that any efforts to “weaponize” the Community Notes feature would be hampered due to the open-source nature of its code and data.
It is also worth noting that other users also rate those who are able to use the feature, so posting blatantly inaccurate or unproductive notes would be penalized and eventually not allowed to be part of Community Notes. Still, despite open-source code, there are valid reasons to be concerned about users abusing the system to push a political agenda.
Most who have used the platform since before Musk took over remember the days when the company’s content moderation staff would summarily censor, block, suspend, or even ban users who expressed opinions that contradicted narratives spread by the left. It was evident that these individuals were operating on political bias, not a desire to ensure accurate information. The release of the Twitter Files proved this, even though the company’s prior leadership swore up and down that this was not happening.
Undoubtedly, folks who simply want to punish users with whom they disagree will weaponize the Community Notes feature to shut down these individuals by cutting off their income. Since leftists no longer enjoy supremacy over X, this could be another way for them to silence opposing views.
We also have the issue of subjectivity. Some might be concerned about the nature of “truth.” Who decides what is true and what is misinformation? The feature requires those writing notes to provide links to credible sources, but who decides what is credible? Someone on the left might immediately dismiss a factual article coming from Fox News or The Federalist simply because they are right-leaning outlets. Those on the right could do the same for notes using links from CNN, MSNBC, or The New York Times.
But, again, the Community Notes system allows other users to scrutinize notes and rate them as helpful or unhelpful. As someone who has used the feature, I have given ratings to several notes and had some of mine published. Users are incentivized to provide information that is as accurate as possible.
Another issue that hits close to my heart is how it could affect those posting satire or parody. As a satirist who has been fact-checked and Community Noted on several occasions, the idea that my humor could be demonetized doesn’t quite sit well with me. Some suggested making exceptions for satirical posts that are Community Noted to help those who tend to believe satire is real.
In 2023, the world has become so ridiculous that many users on the platform will believe even the most outrageous satire, which is why I don’t resent being Community Noted. However, if it means I get the post demonetized because too many people can’t understand jokes, it seems to be an unfair punishment. Of course, this could be rectified by adding a section where a person can rate something as satire without making it ineligible for revenue sharing.
All in all, the new policy might be an overall positive if some of the kinks and details are worked out. It is a way to ensure people are getting accurate information without censoring users. However, some of the problems people pointed out will have to be addressed for it to be a fair and useful policy.
