Is Having X (Formerly Twitter) a Good Idea for Brands and Public Figures? The Truth About Free Speech and Reputation

Since Elon Musk’s takeover of X (formerly Twitter), the platform has embraced a more laissez-faire approach to content moderation, positioning itself as a champion of free speech. But with this increased freedom comes the potential for reputational risk. For brands and public figures, the question arises: Is it worth maintaining an active presence on X, or does the platform’s approach to content policing present too many challenges?

The Appeal of X: Freedom and Reach

X has long been a go-to platform for real-time engagement, allowing brands and public figures to interact directly with their audiences. It’s quick, direct, and offers a level of immediacy that few other platforms can match. With millions of active users worldwide, having a presence on X means access to an enormous, diverse audience.

Musk’s free speech-driven policies have opened the floodgates to more controversial content, and while this might appeal to those wanting an unfiltered platform, it also means brands and public figures may be exposed to potentially damaging interactions.

The Risks: Misinformation, Hate Speech, and Content Policing

With X’s looser content moderation policies, misinformation, hate speech, and inflammatory content have been on the rise. Brands that engage on the platform must be hyper-vigilant, as their posts can quickly become the subject of heated debates or even targeted harassment. Furthermore, X has also scaled back many of its content moderation efforts, leaving harmful content unchecked longer than before.

While there’s still some policing, much of it now relies on user reports rather than proactive moderation. This makes it difficult for brands to manage their reputations, as once damaging content is out there, it can spread rapidly.

Real Facts About X's Content Moderation

  • Algorithm Changes: X’s algorithms now prioritize visibility based on engagement, which means provocative or controversial content often rises to the top. While this boosts exposure, it also makes it harder to control the narrative.

  • Reduced Moderation: Since Musk’s leadership, X has cut staff in its moderation teams, leading to slower response times for reports of abuse, hate speech, and disinformation.

  • Community Notes: X has introduced 'Community Notes,' a crowdsourced content moderation tool where users can flag and add context to misleading or harmful posts. However, this system relies on public opinion, which can be biased or inconsistent.

Reputational Impact: The Pros and Cons

Pros:

  • Direct, unfiltered access to millions of users.

  • Real-time engagement for marketing, customer service, and crisis communication.

  • Strong potential for viral reach if posts resonate.

Cons:

  • Increased risk of association with controversial or harmful content.

  • Difficult to control the spread of misinformation or hate speech.

  • Limited response from X’s moderation team, leading to potential brand damage.

So, Should Brands and Public Figures Stay on X?

Ultimately, the decision depends on your brand’s values and your tolerance for reputational risk. For those who thrive in unfiltered environments and can actively manage their content, X may still be a valuable tool. However, if your brand is more conservative or wants to avoid potential backlash, other platforms with stronger content moderation may be a safer bet.

Brands and public figures should carefully weigh the pros and cons, and most importantly, have a solid crisis management plan in place. Engaging on X may offer reach, but it also requires careful navigation.

Lauren BeechingComment