Why Bits of Freedom is no longer active on X
As of December 19, 2024, Bits of Freedom is no longer active on X. We'd like to explain why.
Bits of Freedom and Big Tech
We believe that a strong democratic rule of law is essential for living together in freedom and equality. The power of technology must lie in the hands of people who strive for this. When it comes to digitized societies, the right to privacy and freedom of communication are particularly essential to empower individuals and curb the power of governments and corporations. Bits of Freedom has been committed to this cause for 25 years.
Big Tech platforms play an interesting role in our work. Social media have traditionally been low-barrier spaces where people can easily publish and engage in discussions. However, over the past fifteen years, Big Tech platforms have become so dominant that they have a negative impact on the public debate and the rights and freedoms of their users. From arbitrary content moderation and unwarranted interference to the amplification of extremist content and privacy violations, it’s no surprise that in 2019, we sent an invoice to Facebook and Google for the hours we spent "fixing" the messes they created.
Facebook and Google never paid. And we’ve long since stopped politely asking Big Tech to correct their mistakes. The problems with Big Tech are rooted in the core of their business. The only way to truly address this is through a radical reform of our online information ecosystem. Over the past decade, we’ve fully focused on advocating for legislation that enforces strict rules and raising awareness among users. As our campaign last year stated: I love technology, but only on my terms.
Bits of Freedom on Big Tech platforms
Putting our values into practice is incredibly important to us. We don’t accept money from Big Tech or governments because we believe it would compromise our ability to work independently. We developed our own donor software to ensure the privacy of our supporters. And nowhere in our operations are we dependent on Google. We believe this approach strengthens the legitimacy, reliability, and resilience of our organization.t
Something that's been a thorn in our side? Our use of Big Tech platforms to share our message and connect with people. We use them because we want to reach people where they are. And it’s especially important that those who use Big Tech are made aware of how Big Tech uses them. Worse than shouting into the void is preaching to the converted.
But, as we wrote back in 2015, we are not exactly "100% happy" about it. That understatement has only grown in scale over the past decade. No matter how you look at it, our presence on Big Tech platforms adds value to their ecosystems. You could even argue that by using these platforms, we inadvertently legitimize their practices. That’s why we’ve set some rules for ourselves. We don’t advertise, we don’t offer anything exclusively on social media, and we're always encouraging people on these platforms to connect with us via email or through alternative platforms.
"X is clearly no longer a communication platform, but a political project. As such, we can no longer justify our presence on X."
The transformation of Twitter into X
And then Twitter, the platform where we were most active (32,179 followers!), was sold to Elon Musk. Blocked users were welcomed back, and the verified account status (the blue check), which once signaled an account was legit, was effectively abolished. Overtly hateful content and the accounts responsible for it were condoned and even amplified. Content moderation teams were dismantled. As a result, participating on X became impossible for many people. Not only is this approach inappropriate for a platform of X’s scale; it also encourages other platforms to shirk their responsibilities—which, predictably, they did.
Is X the only platform where algorithmic amplification of extremism and arbitrary content moderation are rampant? Certainly not. But with the adjustments to X’s algorithm that prioritized Musk’s own tweets and the deliberate amplification of hate, conspiracy theories, and disinformation leading up to the U.S. presidential election, X reached an unprecedented low. X is clearly no longer a communication platform, but a political project. And for that reason, we can no longer justify our presence on X. X is exit.
What's next?
Cory Doctorow wrote a beautiful piece explaining why it's a bad idea to be present on platforms that act as intermediaries between you and your audience. They "give" you an audience, but they can also hold that audience hostage. We completely agree with this. That’s why we're focussing on three things. We remain active on platforms that serve as gatekeepers (LinkedIn, Instagram, Bluesky), we promote and invest in channels that we fully control (email us!), and we encourage the use of decentralized platforms (Mastodon), where users are in charge.
For now, that means no full exodus from Big Tech. Will we stay on other Big Tech platforms forever? Maybe, but probably not. Determining when, like with X, a line has been crossed, is not a hard science. We’ll continue to carefully weigh all the relevant facts and share our considerations with you. In the meantime, we’ll continue to build a communication landscape where your rights and freedoms are at the center.