LONDON: Elon Musk should face “personal sanctions” and potentially even the threat of an “arrest warrant” if he is found to have encouraged public disorder on his social media platform X, according to a former Twitter executive.
Bruce Daisley, who previously served as Twitter’s vice president for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, argued on Monday that it was unacceptable for the billionaire owner of X, formerly Twitter, to sow discord without facing personal consequences.
Daisley’s comments come in the aftermath of week-long far-right riots across England and Northern Ireland, during which asylum hotels and mosques were attacked, The Guardian reported on Monday.
The unrest was stirred up and inflamed by online posts, including one from Musk stating that “civil war is inevitable” in the UK — a remark that Justice Minister Heidi Alexander condemned as “unacceptable.”
Musk also criticized Prime Minister Keir Starmer, labeling him “two-tier Keir” and a “hypocrite” for his handling of policing, and shared, then deleted, a false post claiming Starmer planned to establish “detainment camps” in the Falkland Islands.
Daisley suggested that Starmer should “beef up” online safety laws and reconsider whether the media regulator, Ofcom, is adequately equipped to manage the rapid actions of individuals like Musk.
He argued that the threat of personal sanctions could be more effective than corporate fines, particularly in influencing the lifestyles of tech billionaires.
Daisley, who worked at Twitter from 2012-2020, described Musk as someone who “has taken on the aura of a teenager on the bus with no headphones, creating lots of noise,” The Guardian reported.
“Were Musk to continue stirring up unrest, an arrest warrant for him might produce fireworks from his fingertips, but as an international jet-setter it would have the effect of focusing his mind.
“Musk’s actions should be a wake-up call for Starmer’s government to quietly legislate to take back control of what we collectively agree is permissible on social media.”
He argued: “In my experience, that threat of personal sanction is much more effective on executives than the risk of corporate fines.
“The question we are presented with is whether we’re willing to allow a billionaire oligarch to camp off the UK coastline and take potshots at our society. The idea that a boycott — whether by high-profile users or advertisers — should be our only sanction is clearly not meaningful.”
Daisley also pointed out that under existing laws, Musk and other executives could be held criminally liable for their actions.
He called for Britain’s Online Safety Act 2023 to be strengthened as a matter of urgency and added: “Musk might force his angry tweets to the top of your timeline, but the will of a democratically elected government should mean more than the fury of a tech oligarch — even him.”
Following the fatal stabbing of three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed holiday dance class in Southport last month, the UK government has urged social media platforms to act responsibly, accusing them of enabling the spread of false claims about the attacker being an asylum-seeker. Police are already increasingly targeting individuals suspected of using online posts to incite violence, The Guardian reported.
keywords
