About a month ago I was having a discussion with a college student regarding the impact social media has to control or censor information. The topic of Twitter came up with their banning of public figures, i.e. President Trump, while still allowing dictators and hostile governments to still ‘Tweet’. The discussion was around how much power they have to control and censor information.
PLEASE NOTE, THIS IS NOT A POST ON WHAT SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE CRITERIA FOR BANNING OR CENSORING PEOPLE ON TWITTER OR ANY SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM.
The student felt that Twitter is a private company (non-government) and should be free to allow or disallow whomever they wanted, even if it is used by federal, state, and local governments along with elected officials at all levels, to provide information to the public. If people didn’t like it, they could just go to some other platform, ‘what’s the big deal.’ They also felt that Twitter should censor and ban people that were spreading, ‘disinformation’, and were being socially responsible in doing so.
I asked based on who’s standards of ‘socially responsible?’ Who determines what those are? We have a private (non-governmental) company with mass global reach, determining what is socially acceptable. Approximately 85% of Twitter’s revenue comes from Ad sales.
I asked what if someone came in and bought Twitter and took it private. In doing so they moved the platform in their own personal direction and used their own social standards, whatever they may be, to censor content and ban individuals. How would you feel about that? Their response was, ‘Twitter is too big for that to happen.’
So how do people feel about Twitter being purchased by Elon Musk? Well, some are ecstatic, and others are going into meltdown. We now have calls from people, who in the past fully supported Twitter’s right to self-censor, to have the federal government become more involved in regulating social media. On the other hand, those who wanted more control of social media by the government, are changing their positions.
The Power Dynamic has changed and from a Process Perspective it is important to observe how people are behaving. How are those who have lost their perceived power reacting and how are those who feel they are now in a greater position of power behaving? In negotiations we need to be aware, and plan for shifts or changes in the perception of Power. How will the other party react, and how will we react to these changes?
Anticipate the potential actions of both parties when shifts in Power occur, then develop strategies prior to the negotiation, to best manage changes in the Power Dynamic as you progress through the negotiation. In doing this, you will reduce the likelihood of your team going into meltdown mode or becoming overconfident in your position of Power in the negotiation. If either of these occur, the probability of you reaching your desired outcome will be reduced.