Does Twitter add anything to “debate”?

There has been a lot of ink around Musk’s takeover (some bordering on the conspiracy), though the political divide is obvious. I have been writing here repeatedly – Twitter is bereft of nuance and “debate” and is a raucous bubble that is endearingly called a “public square”. The truth is not anywhere in between.

Here’s its impact on the UK Politics:

Twitter’s bubbles are a blight on British politics | Financial Times

The UK’s political bubble, itself contained within Twitter’s self-selecting bubble of users, is becoming insufferable. What was once an easy way of exploring the news — and an irreverent way of debating it — has turned into a factional cesspit. There is no irony, nuance or compassion for altering points of view. But its damage to the politics and policy is real and deep.

Its immediacy, however, is one of the chief reasons politics has such a shrunken horizon. Issues come and go within hours. When a controversy or gaffe starts trending, parties are forced to react. Take the government’s rail plan published last November: nearly £100bn, the biggest investment in British railways in decades. Twitter cried betrayal because the eastern leg of High Speed 2 was paused; the rest of the announcement was lost.

There’s no point in using a platform that doesn’t know why it was formed in the first place and why its captured the mainstream attention. Using it for anything else will not serve the purpose.

That’s why I insist on blogging. The nuances can be clarified. My view remains mine (an insight), but I use this as a test bed for ideas.