Twitter amnesty and a reflection on efficacy

It has been entertaining to follow the peculiar outrage by legacy media of Elon Musk’s housecleaning at Twitter over the past month. Following a successful poll regarding general amnesty for accounts that did were banned despite doing nothing illegal or terribly obnoxious - accounts such as mine, I hope - Musk announced that permanent bans would be undone next week (the end of November). This will presumably mean interesting times for the mRNA vaccine appreciation crew on Twitter. There was quite a focused campaign of purging accounts that showed too much interest in the downsides of mRNA vaccines prior to Musk’s arrival.

Presumably it is coincidental that Pfizer pulled its advertising from Twitter after Musk’s taking ownership.

It is also noteworthy that Musk has also begun focusing on eliminating Twitter accounts that feature child exploitation and accounts that promote physical violence. In this measure, one sees an interest in child welfare, that is refreshing.

+++++++++++++++++++++

My family enjoyed my increased presence during the time that I was banned from Twitter. I was more present, relaxed, less “plugged in” to the minute-by-minute pace of the social media news cycle. This was assisted by the pretty friendly environment that Gettr presented, in the sense that it is a bit of a monoculture of like-minded thinkers, so no flame wars and very little irony. And little engagement as a result.

On the eve of a likely return to Twitter, one matter to ponder is how to moderate use, and how to be effective. The mRNA vaccine education stream on Twitter had become impoverished over time, the result of banning accounts that shared useful/critical information. And the result of Twitter policing mRNA vaccine tweets to an absurd degree.

On the question of effectiveness, it is a mystery to me how my account there grew as it did - at the time of suspension, I had thirty-three thousand followers. I presume that this is a reflection of the utility of what I was writing — it could have been a whole bunch of bots too, for all I know. As with many writers on Substack who arrived after being banned by Twitter, the question of efficacy was almost a matter of seeing when the “flak” became intense - i.e. insults, threats, doxxing, suspensions. This is a rather negative way of assessing effectiveness.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Reflecting upon the past two years of activity as a medical journalist, the single act that I am most pleased about was setting up the petition to Canada’s Parliament asking for a moratorium on child covid vaccination, back in May 2021. Although the federal election enabled it to be thrown in the garbage - truly a peculiar policy - I feel that the petition presented a reasonable and cautious approach. It would have been interesting to have seen legislators actually weighing the evidence for and against child covid vaccines.

My work on Twitter made the petition possible. Had the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario not begun investigating my involvement with social media, I would have likely continued liaising with decision-makers on the child vaccination issue.

As much as Twitter is fun - there is something about its format and social structure that lends itself to quips and one-liners - it plays havoc on my ability to manage my time and energy. In this, it is much like TikTok and Instagram - a place where unsettled younger minds go in order to space out.

How to use Twitter effectively?

How to use Twitter in a measured fashion? A healthy fashion?