When Elon Musk brought his sink to the headquarters of Twitter “Let that sink in” did it occur to anyone that certain realities were about to encroach on its users too? Twitter is a democratic space. Elon Musk a strong advocate for free speech must have been slightly torn by the prospect of making people pay for the privilege.

This is not a Musk hit-piece, it is an appeal to his senses directly.

Here are 10 reasons why social media, led by Musk’s Twitter is heading in the wrong direction by charging people and dividing people with subscriptions:

1. It undermines public trust in social media platforms like Twitter by creating an appearance that verified status can be bought rather than earned through authenticity.

2. It creates an unfair advantage for those who can afford to pay for verification over those who cannot, which could exacerbate existing power imbalances and make it more difficult for marginalized voices to gain traction on the platform.

3. It sets a precedent wherein verified status becomes just another product that can be purchased instead of something that must be genuinely earned, further eroding trust in online identity systems.

4. Verifying a user without proper vetting process opens up opportunity for fraudulent accounts to masquerade as legitimate sources of news, opinion, and information, potentially spreading misinformation and disinformation.

5. Paying for verification incentivizes users to prioritize their own personal brand building efforts over meaningful contribution to conversations and communities, further amplifying narcissism and selfishness already present on social media.

6. The perception created by charging for verified status fosters cynicism toward business leaders who claim to act in the interest of broader society while simultaneously profiting from individuals’ desire to appear important within specific online circles.

7. Increasing the cost of maintaining a verified account on Twitter could discourage low-income users from continuing to participate on the site, reducing overall diversity of perspectives and experiences shared.

8. Charging money for verification reinforces the idea that online interactions should be commodified or monetized, perpetuating consumer culture values rather than encouraging community oriented attitudes.

9. Adopting this practice would further contribute to Silicon Valley executives making choices that benefit themselves financially but detract from wellbeing of wider society, exacerbating concerns around income inequality and corruption among tech elites.

10. Each monetized bit of information shared on Twitter is shaped by its commercial appeal, not a revelation of ones actual value to communities. This disenfranchises the authentic in human beings. It robs us of our actual worth by prioritizing the sensational, the shallow of meaning, the controversial; as we see with YouTube and all those videos with the manic overly expressive shock face desperately trying to net viewers, set by the loudest and fastest talkers.
This contributes to that firehose of madness that is taking over the internet.

A more general issue arises if corporations begin treating valuable features previously available to everyone equally under a “universal” approach. This paradigm shift away from inclusivity runs counterintuitive to ethically responsible design patterns advocated for by experts and echoes sentiments behind the “digital divide,” a term used to describe disparities that prevent some populations from benefitting from technology fully due to structural barriers.

Overall, implementing paid verification could have ripple effects across social media and broader society. By favoring wealth over merit, people might lose faith in the ability to earn legitimacy, trust, and reputation online, ultimately shifting norms towards commercialization and transactionalism at every turn, even beyond social media (e.g., in personal relationships).

People on low income and disability payments cannot afford it, and where they can they often use phone service carriers that are not recognized by Musk’s Twitter. The results of this serve factions driven by greed.

Protest and effective protest is unlikely. People who make money from this plan dominate the attention. People who can’t pay, or won’t because of the above reasons, will not get their voices heard on social media. Political representation of these people is further endangered. This is the future of digital democracy that we were warned about.

It is becoming a reality before our eyes.

Elon Musk plans a TruthGPT AI. It is probably about time we assess what this will mean, since – with truth comes the need for compassion. What we may discover about reality as well as social and political reality will require unconditional love, to forgive one another. Otherwise the truth will divide us further.

If we can’t all share our hearts and minds on social media equally, in truth and compassion (whilst being free of the woke police, as Musk desires) we risk everything about humans becoming monetized, including truth – and therein lays the rapid path to the abyss.