Adam-Rizzieri-joins-Newsmax-Elon-Musks-Plans-for-Twitter-2.0

Newsmax: Musk’s Evolving Twitter Policies Part of ‘Greater Plan’ for Platform

Originally published on December 20, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

In the weeks since billionaire Elon Musk took over as Twitter CEO, he’s instituted a range of decisions — from moderation to site policy to transparency — in rapid succession that has left even some supporters of his $44 billion bid to purchase the social media behemoth scratching their heads.

But even those who question the wisdom of his recent moves warn that you “can never underestimate” the (frequently) world’s richest man who earned his vast fortune building cars that drive themselves and rockets that may one day ferry the first human to Mars.

Musk had been applauded by conservatives and libertarians for shining a light on Twitter’s previously shielded internal machinations, particularly those involving coordination with government entities, censorship of right-leaning accounts, and suppression of news stories. The latest “Twitter files” revelations went public on Monday afternoon.

 

Some of his subsequent decisions, however, have been more difficult for free speech advocates to square.

Musk has, in recent days, briefly suspended the accounts of journalists who he accused of “doxxing” his location; decided to prohibit linking to several rival sites, including Facebook, Instagram, and Mastodon; and appeared to govern, at least partially, by user poll, with one of the latest surveys asking if he should step down as head of the company.

“Whether Elon Musk is operating according to plan or is making it up as he goes along is hard to tell,” said entrepreneur Jeff Webb, the founder of Varsity Spirit who also serves as senior news editor of Human Events.

But whether the initiatives are spur-of-the-moment experiments or more calculated moves, Webb cautions not to dismiss Musk.

“Just look at what he has done with Tesla, SpaceX, and now Twitter,” Webb said. “You can never underestimate him, regardless of how far out he has planned his next move.”

Musk may have been surprised that more than half of the 17.5 million users who voted felt that he should step down as Twitter CEO when the poll closed on Monday. He hasn’t made any announcements about leadership changes despite vowing to adhere to the poll’s results.

But Webb points out that the poll may also be part of the plan.

Elon Musk Twitter CEO Poll Dec 2022Many people predicted a “transition period” would occur during which Musk would “bring the bias to light and put Twitter on the road to a transparent and fair medium before stepping down for another CEO once he did that.”

“We may very well be at that moment now,” he said.

Jeff Bermant, founder and CEO of Tusk, a free speech-based web browser, agrees that Musk may be inching toward taking on the role of the “big picture guy” and not the “day-to-day guy” at Twitter.

In posting the poll about his future at the company, Bermant said it appears like Musk is “probably leaning toward giving up the CEO role and bringing someone else on,” something which he called a “good business decision.”

Dallas-based digital marketing expert and CMO of Agency Partner Interactive Adam Rizzieri points out that all of Musk’s decisions since his takeover have been aimed at taking private an unprofitable public company that was surviving on “Wall Street’s big bank funny money” so that he could make “drastic changes” that the former management was unable or unwilling to make — and do it “without being called out for breaching their fiduciary responsibilities.”

“The fact is that when a business is actively fixing big problems, smaller problems may pop up along the way, and that’s what we’re seeing with Twitter 2.0,” Rizzieri said.

And with every change Musk makes, he said Twitter users have a rare front-row seat “witnessing a live social experiment.”

Because some experiments are bound to fail, Rizzieri said he expects to see Musk “mitigate loss and allow a quick pivot towards something else that may create value.”

“We will likely see a lot of this, especially as it pertains to fixing Twitter’s policies and community standards,” he said.

As soon as a wide spectrum of Twitter users began to express frustration at the swath of journalists’ accounts being suspended, many of the accounts in question were restored following an online poll by Musk. He also admitted he made a mistake in launching new speech restrictions that banned mentions of rival social media websites.

Despite the negative press and the occasional failed experiment, Rizzieri believes it is “all part of Musk’s greater plan” in creating a free speech platform.

“From day one, Twitter required extensive, expensive changes,” he said. “Since Old Twitter became Twitter 2.0, the organizational chart has been rightfully cut in half, decimating operating costs. And the Twitter Blue revenue channel has been reinvigorated as user growth is hitting all-time highs.

“The future has never been brighter for Twitter.”

As Musk continues his massive overhaul, Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, said some of the fallout from his decisions are merely “growing pains” that are “natural to any tech company.”

He notes that Twitter is receiving more scrutiny right now than other social media sites that have gone through rough patches because it is a widely used platform that has existed for a decade.

“[Twitter] is in a very odd position because there’s been a big change on a well-known platform in a short period of time,” he said.

As Musk works out the kinks, however, Selepak said the self-proclaimed “chief twit” isn’t doing himself any favors when he contradicts himself on certain policies, using as an example the recent account bans despite portraying himself as a “free speech absolutist.”

And though Selepak said it appears that Musk is quickly “making up some of these things as he goes along,” Sarah Johnson, a media relations expert, advises that Musk is “much smarter than most of his critics are giving him credit [for.]”

She points out that as Musk sets out to transform the microblogging site into a “town hall forum” where “all voices could be heard,” he has “proven his chops by showing that Twitter can function, and even thrive, without the myriad workers the company once employed, and there’s a night and day difference in terms of transparency.”

While he operates in a manner that “many might describe as a ‘fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants’ style,” she suspects Musk “wants to make as many changes as quickly as possible.”

She notes that he also “learns quickly from his mistakes or from policies that haven’t always been thought out to the fullest.”

“He owns the mishaps and tweaks the execution until it’s where he wants it to be,” Johnson said. “Overall, the changes he’s implemented in the last two months are staggering.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Newsmax: Meta Likely to Reinstate Trump’s Facebook Account, Experts Say

Originally published on December 19, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

Despite the efforts of leading Democrats to pressure Meta into extending the ban keeping former President Donald Trump off Facebook, social media experts predict the tech company will reinstate Trump’s account once the company’s self-imposed two-year suspension expires next month.

Trump was suspended from the platform due to what the site alleged was his involvement in inciting a “riot” at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

But with Meta set to reevaluate that ban in January, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., penned a letter with Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., André Carson, D-Ind., and Kathy Castor, D-Fla., arguing that reinstating Trump’s account will allow him to post “conspiratorial rhetoric” that could “only serve as a motivation to incite violence.”

Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, called their claims that posting “misinformation leads to violence” flawed, and an argument that Meta is likely to overlook when making its decision.

Ultimately, he believes Meta will reinstate Trump’s account under the condition that he doesn’t violate the platform’s terms of service, which apply to any user.

While Schiff and other Democrats may believe Trump is “more unhinged and dangerous than ever,” Selepak said that, even accepting that argument, there is a difference between inciting violence and posting information that may be factually incorrect or untrue.

“Any user has the ability, as long as they are not violating the terms of services, to post whatever they want whether it’s factually true or untrue,” he said.

While Meta will likely make it clear that Trump can’t advocate for “death, murder, or mayhem” on his Facebook or Instagram accounts — which he’s never done, and no user is allowed to do — Selepak said it is likely that Trump will have the ability to post his contention that the 2020 election was stolen or use his account to fundraise for his 2024 presidential campaign.

Entrepreneur Jeff Webb, who serves as senior news editor of Human Events, also expects Trump’s Facebook ban to be lifted, especially since the new Twitter owner and CEO Elon Musk allowed the former president to regain access to his Twitter account despite facing a lifetime ban.

“Elon Musk has set a new standard,” Webb said. “He’s walking the talk by being transparent and evenhanded.”

After Musk decided to expose the inner workings of the social media giant via the “Twitter files,” Webb said he has “come down squarely against blatant discrimination and suppression of free speech.”

Because extending Trump’s Facebook ban would likely “require additional disclosures on their processes,” an undertaking Webb believes Meta is not inclined to pursue, he believes Trump’s accounts will be reinstated.

Selepak agrees, noting that while Musk’s decision to allow Trump back on the microblogging site put “slight pressure” on Meta to do the same, it was the “Twitter files” dump that really puts Meta in a position where they are going to have to make a “very public decision” to allow Trump back on.

He said the “Twitter files” — which revealed that some top employees at the social media behemoth believed that tweets written by Trump about the events of Jan. 6 did not actually violate the site’s policies — also puts pressure on Meta to release their own version of the “Facebook files” to show what discussions led to Trump being banned.

“Without revealing what led to that decision, people are going to assume it was done in a similar way to what Twitter did,” Selepak said.

Webb agrees that Meta “should let the public see how their decisions on banning were made, who made them, and whether or not they had any kind of rational basis at all, or if it was just blatant discrimination.”

“In the U.S., one of the real pillars of a modern democracy is free speech and the ability to have dissenting political views,” he said. “When you start methodically and institutionally diminishing that, you see the real threat to democracy take shape.”

Dallas-based digital marketing expert Adam Rizzieri points out that Meta isn’t only facing pressure from Musk and the Twitter files when it comes to lifting the ban on Trump. The social media company also soon must answer to a GOP-controlled House that will “undoubtedly focus on prior censorship, electioneering, visibility filtering, and suspension decisions.”

“As we forge into 2023, Meta will be under increasingly aggressive pressure to un-ban President Trump’s account,” he said. “They will also face tough questions about how they will treat elected officials and candidates in the future.”

With Trump a declared candidate for the 2024 presidential election, Rizzieri said that official status “strongly favors that his account be reinstated on Meta.”

Although the former president has not yet returned to Twitter, opting to stick with his own social media platform, Truth Social, experts agree that he may be tempted to return to Facebook.

While Truth Social, like Twitter, is a microblogging site, Rizzieri points out that Facebook offers a different style of social media platform — and broadcasts it to a far larger audience.

Also, because Facebook, which “allows for much longer form content styles and user groups,” isn’t in “direct competition” with Truth Social, Rizzieri said he could see a rationale for Trump’s return to the site.

Even if Trump doesn’t personally use the account, he said his campaign staff will “almost certainly use it.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Elon Musk Twitter vs TikTok

Newsmax: Could Musk Create Legitimate TikTok Competitor?

Originally published on November 29, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

The clock might be running out for TikTok.

With officials in both parties raising national security concerns over the threat posed by the popular Chinese-owned video app TikTok, tech experts say Elon Musk’s recent purchase of Twitter could potentially hold the key to crushing the controversial Chinese creation.

Since his $44 billion takeover of the social media platform, Musk, the world’s richest man, has been looking for ways to make his investment profitable. Techies say the answer could lie in creating a video component that rivals TikTok and even cuts into views of dominant video platform YouTube.

Dallas-based digital marketing expert and CMO of Agency Partner Interactive Adam Rizzieri believes Musk is already on his way to creating a viable go-to video platform as he works toward his overall goal of growing Twitter into a “super app” that is capable of not only providing users with a forum to micro-blog, stream video, and even a way to pay for things.

“What is true of a social platform today may be very different from tomorrow’s reality,” Rizzieri said.

Even before Musk officially took over, Twitter had been moving toward integrating more video components into its social media platform.

In September, it announced two new video-focused features for its app. One feature, known as the “immersive media viewer” allows users to open videos in a vertical “full-screen mode” and view more videos by swiping up. Both of those features mirror TikTok.

The second video-focused feature Twitter announced is a new video carousel located in the “Explore” tab. In the section, there is a “Videos for you” spot that displays a series of popular videos a user may be interested in viewing.

Musk has also expressed interest in adding more video components to the app.

One of his first moves involved asking Twitter engineers to reboot Vine, a video platform that Twitter purchased in 2012 for $30 million.

In a Twitter exchange with YouTube personality Mr. Beast about daily active users on Twitter compared to YouTube, Musk hinted that the numbers could shift “when Twitter offers good video with higher compensation for creators…”

In order for Twitter to “really compete” against TikTok, Rizzieri said it must “continue to invest in their video sharing and event streaming capabilities.”

He points out that Twitter users go to the app for breaking news, trends, and the resulting commentary, while TikTok users are often looking for entertainment and diversion.

One area where he believes Twitter has an advantage over TikTok is the coverage of live, real-time events.

“Twitter is in the moment and TikTok captures and shares something that has already happened,” he said. “Because of that, Twitter offers a value proposition that TikTok doesn’t have.”

Even with a push into video underway, Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, doesn’t believe Musk will be able to whisk TikTokers away from the popular video app – unless the government steps in.

Multiple agencies, including the FBI and Federal Communications Commission, and several congressional lawmakers have expressed fears over the possibility of the Chinese government tapping into the video-sharing app to influence users and even control their devices.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has called for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to ban the app over concerns about users’ data security. FBI Director Christopher Wray has voiced similar concerns.

He told lawmakers earlier this month that risks include “the possibility that the Chinese government could use to control data collection on millions of users or control the recommendation algorithm, which could be used for influence operations.”

The red flags about TikTok and its influence are not new.

The Trump administration began sounding the alarm on the app being linked to the Chinese Communist Party and tried to ban the app in 2020.

But former President Donald Trump’s attempts were overturned by President Joe Biden in 2021 after he withdrew a spate of Trump executive orders that sought to ban new downloads of the apps and ordered the Commerce Department to conduct a review of security concerns posed by the apps.

In 2020, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which reviews U.S. acquisitions by foreign acquirers for potential national security risks, ordered ByteDance to divest TikTok because of fears that U.S. user data could be passed on to China’s communist government.

In September, TikTok executive Vanessa Pappas told lawmakers that TikTok was making “progress toward a final agreement with the U.S. government to further safeguard U.S. user data and fully address U.S. national security interests.”

With calls for the app to be banned again circulating, tech experts say Musk could easily swoop in with a replacement.

Selepak believes it would take a total government ban on TikTok for Musk to be able to compete.

That’s because currently, he is not only up against TikTok but Instagram’s video component “reels,” which has tried to compete with TikTok.

Selepak said video creators typically post their clips to TikTok and then repurpose them to reels, instead of abandoning TikTok for Instagram.

Under the current landscape, he highly doubts that Twitter’s revamped Vine would be a “TikTok killer.”

That, however, could change if TikTok is no longer an option.

In that scenario, he said Vine and Twitter could dominate as it moves into the void – if Musk can convince creators to post to his platform over Instagram.

If TikTok remains available, Selepak said Musk could use Twitter to make a “big push” exposing the dangers of TikTok by essentially launching a “direct attack” against the CCP to convince people to switch platforms.

But that may not be a likely course of action considering Musk’s other companies, including Tesla, have a major presence in China.

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Adam Rizzieri with Newsmax_Will_Trump_Still_Shun_Twitter_if_Musk_Reinstates_Him?

Newsmax: Will Trump Still Shun Twitter if Musk Reinstates Him?

Originally published on April 27, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

Even though former President Donald Trump is swearing off a return to Twitter, social media gurus aren’t so sure he’ll stick to that promise – if his account is reinstated.

The chances Trump’s account will be reinstated – enabling him to instantly communicate with his 89 million followers – grew significantly after entrepreneur and self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” Elon Musk purchased the social media platform for $44 billion on Monday.

The world’s richest man vowed to make the platform “better than ever” with new features bolstering free speech.

 

 

But just how much of a free-speech champion the outspoken Tesla and SpaceX boss really is could be put to the test when it comes to deciding what to do about Trump’s account.

Trump was permanently banned due to a so-called “risk of further incitement of violence” following the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol.

While Musk hasn’t specifically addressed plans to continue the ban or overturn it once he takes the reins of the company, he has publicly commented on his feelings toward permanent bans in general.

During a recent TED interview, he said he would be “very reluctant” to delete posts or permanently ban users who violate the company’s rules.

 

 

 

Big tech experts so far are betting on Musk reinstating Trump’s account. And while Trump has said he is sticking with his own platform, Truth Social, politicians have been known to change their positions.

Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, said that if Trump is allowed back on Twitter, he has “absolutely no doubts” that he will eventually return to his prolific tweeting.

“There is a very good chance that Trump will be allowed back on,” he said. “And if he is allowed back on, he 100% will do so.”

Considering Trump boasted 89 million followers on Twitter and has just 1.6 million so far on the relatively new Truth Social, experts don’t see him abandoning such a large audience, especially if he plans to make another run for the White House.

Selepak said Trump’s political aspirations could dictate what moves both Trump and Musk make when it comes to Twitter.

If Trump decides to run for another term in 2024, Selepak said Musk won’t want to “limit the voice” or get into “any type of battle” with a person who could ultimately be able to sign executive orders or champion legislation that could hurt his other companies like Tesla or SpaceX.

Selepak points out that Musk’s companies have enjoyed tax breaks, incentives, and government contracts and he won’t want to risk any existing relationships his other ventures enjoy with the government.

“If Trump does run, Musk could make the decision to allow him to be back on to not create an enemy with someone who could be in the White House,” he said.

Because Twitter has a longstanding policy about providing world leaders with a presence on the platform, Selepak said Musk could use that argument to easily reinstate Trump.

“Musk could make a much stronger argument to users and everyone else, if Trump decides to run, to give him access back to Twitter than giving it unilaterally before then,” he said.

Ultimately, he believes that Musk’s decision on Trump’s account will come down to what is going to benefit the entrepreneur.

While Selepak doesn’t believe Trump will be able to stay off Twitter if allowed to return, he said there is still a chance he keeps his word.

Because Musk will have the ability to call the shots on what is and isn’t allowed on the site, Selepak said Trump may decide he does not want to be “beholden to Musk.”

Dallas-based marketing expert, Agency Partner’s CMO, Adam Rizzieri agrees that Musk will likely extend the invitation to Trump to return to the platform, calling it a “good business decision for Twitter.”

But he doesn’t necessarily think Trump should accept — if he is serious about getting Truth Social up and running.

He likened a Trump Twitter return to the CEO of Coca-Cola being caught drinking Pepsi in public because the two platforms are “extremely similar in form and function” and are competing for the users.

Stocks tied to Truth Social fell nearly 13% after Musk’s Twitter takeover was announced Monday. On Tuesday, Trump issued a statement highlighting Truth Social as No. 1 among the “Top Free Apps” in the Apple App Store.

Rizzieri said Trump could use a reactivated Twitter account to promote his own venture. But he cautioned that Trump would have to walk a “very fine line” to do so successfully.

“He has to ensure that exclusive, value-added insights are added to Truth Social alone, and Twitter must be nothing more than a teaser for whatever content he is sharing to a Truth Social audience,” he said. “Anything less and he could undermine the growth of his own social platform.”

Rizzieri points out that Truth Social users have doubted Trump’s commitment to the platform because he has only posted once since creating his profile in February. He also noted that Donald Trump Jr. “posts multiple times per waking hour on Twitter,” while he places only two to four posts per day on Truth Social.

Rather than use Truth Social to promote his appearances and news, Rizzieri said Trump’s updates only seem to reach users via proxy updates from his son’s Twitter account or after broadcasts of weekend rallies on TV outlets.

Trump told Fox News Monday that he plans to formally join his own network within the next week.

Still, Rizzieri said Trump’s absence from the platform since its debut has prompted many to question whether they will receive the “direct, real-time access” they had to the former president when he was on Twitter.

Now that Musk and Trump are competing to promote free speech, he said Truth Social’s team will be forced to “dig deep and more rapidly define a unique value proposition that no one else offers.”

“Today, they are a light version of Twitter but without the annoying and unfair politically biased censorship,” Rizzieri said. “It’s a great start. But with a guy like Elon Musk vowing to make Twitter ‘great again,’ Truth Social has to be more innovative.”

As Musk promises to turn Twitter into a “de facto town square,” Selepak said conservatives, who felt their voices were silenced on the platform, will likely return.

He expects that, even before any major changes are announced or implemented, just the news of Musk being at the helm will prompt many users who backed away from Twitter to “change their mind and come back to start using it again.”

A group of House Republicans immediately rejoiced at the news Musk would be taking over, calling on the new social media mogul to “free” Trump.

“Hey, @elonmusk it’s a great week to free @realDonaldTrump,” tweeted the House Republican Conference, which represents 209 lawmakers.

 

 

If enough “big voices on the right” return, he said the presence of their posts will increase without Musk even having to institute changes to the site’s algorithm, which dictates how users see certain posts on their timelines.

Musk has proposed making changes to the platform’s algorithm in order to increase trust.

“Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” he said.

Whether Musk will be able to eliminate “wokeness” from the platform, however, is what Rizzieri called the “$44 billion question.”

“Like President Trump, Elon Musk views wokeness as a virus that has infected Big Tech, the mainstream media, and Netflix,” he said. “The common denominator here is an unelected, ruling class of elitists that all march to the beat of their own drum.”

He said Musk knows that Twitter’s “woke algorithm ignores the mainstream user, giving preference to an out-of-touch class of blue check elites,” referencing the journalists, celebrities, and politicians who are “verified” on the platform.

In order to protect “American exceptionalism,” by “effectively standing up to wokeness,” Rizzieri said Musk knows he has to “allow for good ideas to circulate without unfair censorship.”

He believes that, on Musk’s Twitter, “both good and bad ideas will circulate freely – and the best ones will survive.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Musk's Twitter Swerve Positions Him for Hostile Takeover - Adam Rizzieri Joins Newsmax to Discuss

Newsmax: Musk’s Twitter Swerve Positions Him for Hostile Takeover

Originally published on April 13, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

In declining a seat on Twitter’s board of directors, experts say billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk is likely positioning himself to take an even bigger role in the social media platform.

Just 24 hours after he invested more than $3 billion to secure a 9.2% stake in the company – instantly making him the company’s largest shareholder – it was announced last week that Musk would serve on the company’s board of directors.

But in a shocking reversal, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal said Musk had changed his mind – prompting many to question just what Musk’s plans for the company might be if he isn’t using his influence as a board member.

Because he isn’t serving on the board, Virginia-based marketing expert Eric Alonzi said, Musk is in a “good position to enact a hostile takeover” of the company.

“He does such radical things he very well could take over Twitter and have a unique communication channel in his portfolio of entrepreneurship,” Alonzi said. “He might try to create a platform with true free speech.”

Musk’s decision to abandon the plan to join the board could have to do with a financial stipulation that would have limited Musk to owning no more than a 14.9% stake in the company. It could also have to do with something he has been long advocating for on the platform: free speech.

Dallas-based marketing expert Adam Rizzieri of Agency Partner said Twitter’s leadership team “believed it could tame Musk’s involvement by inviting him to the board with the caveat that he could not own anything more than 14.9% of the company.”

“But there was more to it,” he said. “That invitation also included conditions that could have forced Elon to be less outspoken, less free in his speech.”

In ditching the board seat, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO is free to increase his financial stake above that limit or possibly even become the leader of another company.

Rizzieri points out that Musk owns four times more shares of Twitter than founder Jack Dorsey and has the liquid capital to “do as he pleases,” considering his billionaire status.

“Out of desire he could choose to buy the entire company, even going so far as to remove it from public trading and take it private,” he said. “This would free up the company from regulatory burdens and allow some truly significant changes to take place.”

While Rizzieri believes Musk is more focused on his other business ventures, he said he wouldn’t rule out the possibility.

Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, agrees that Musk’s decision to turn down a seat on the board of directors is a savvy move that will allow him the freedom to both increase his stake and protect his own presence on the platform.

Selepak said that the more of a financial interest Musk owns in Twitter, the harder it will become for the company to censor the self-professed free speech advocate – who’s now not only the company’s largest shareholder but even, potentially, an outright owner.

While a board seat would have certainly afforded Musk a powerful voice, Selepak said he would have been only “one of many voices.”

“By not taking a seat on the board, he can purchase more of the company and become an even louder voice,” he said. “This gives him the ability to say whatever he wants and not be worried about having his content taken down, or suspended, or de-platformed.”

According to a new document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Monday, in addition to his new financial options, Musk is also able to express his opinions about Twitter freely and is allowed to “change his plans at any time, as he deems appropriate.”

If he became a director, Musk likely would have to adhere to the board’s corporate governance, which would have required him to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

Rizzieri said Musk, who “calls it as he sees it, often via a tweet,” didn’t want to bend to the requests of the board.

Musk also has a history of flouting corporate governance. In 2018, he faced securities fraud charges after inaccurately tweeting that he had secured funding to take Tesla private. He agreed to pay a $20 million fine and step aside as the car manufacturer’s chairman for three years.

Shortly before Musk’s ownership in Twitter became public, he publicly criticized the platform’s commitment to free speech and even pondered creating his own rival platform, tweeting the musings to his 81 million followers.

Last month, he created a poll asking his followers whether they believed Twitter adheres to the principle of free speech. An overwhelming majority – 70% of the more than 2 million Twitter voters who chimed in – selected “no.”

Over the past week, he posted a series of tweets making suggestions for the company, taking jabs at the platform, and even tossing out a few jokes.

He suggested the company he just sunk millions into was “dying,” considering that celebrities with massive followings, such as Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber, rarely tweet.

In another snarky post, he suggested deleting the “w” in Twitter in a poll, which garnered support from 57% of his followers.

He then got into a conversation with former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos after he asked users whether Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters should be converted into a homeless shelter “since no one shows up anyway.”

In a way, Selepak said, Musk was sending Twitter’s employees a message that there is a “new sheriff in town,” which he called a “pretty strong move for someone who just purchased into the company.”

While he also deleted some of his posts, it is unclear what role – if any – they may have played in his decision to walk away from the board seat.

Agrawal announced Musk’s change of heart in a lengthy statement he shared on his Twitter page. He said he and the board were excited to work with Musk and, even though he isn’t taking his seat on the board, they will “remain open to his input.”

Alonzi said he wouldn’t be surprised if Musk is just trolling everyone with a “charade,” pointing out he has leveraged tweets about crypto positions that “made him richer” before he ultimately reversed course.

But even without a clearly defined role, Rizzieri said Musk is already shaking things up.

He said just the “idea” of Musk’s involvement in Twitter “sent a positive shock to the market, boosting Twitter’s value.”

“The market knows that Twitter, as is, needs change,” he said.

Rizzieri said the fact that some of Twitter’s internal team has responded negatively to Musk’s presence in the company shows that those working for the platform are “happy with their woke status quo.”

“Contrary to boosts in value, an opposite reaction was detected within the emotionally fragile ranks of Twitter’s employee base,” he said.

He pointed out that some employees flagged Musk’s tweets as “in violation of their HR policies” and asked if Musk would have to adhere to the rules.

Several current and former employees told The New York Times they were concerned about Musk’s tweets criticizing the company considering he has no knowledge of the internal operations. While many were relieved that he wouldn’t be taking a board seat, they told the newspaper they are fearful of what he could do next.

“Even without him on the board and without implementing any actual changes to the platform, Musk’s current involvement in the company has put it on the defensive and already prompted the resignation of many of Twitter’s more politically extreme employees,” Rizzieri said. “Already, that’s a positive return on investment for Twitter, its shareholders, and its users.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Adam Rizzieri with Newsmax Discussing Twitter and Elon Musk

Newsmax: Musk’s Free Speech Fight May Hit Entrenched Resistance at Twitter

Originally published on April 6, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

It took billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk fewer than 24 hours to muscle his way onto Twitter’s board of directors after securing a 9.2% stake in the social media platform Monday morning, instantly making him the company’s largest shareholder – and one not content to remain a “passive” investor.

The Tesla and SpaceX CEO’s nearly $3 billion surprise investment came just weeks after he began increasingly criticizing the platform over a dubious commitment to free speech, at one point even mulling the creation of his own rival platform in posts that went out to his 80 million Twitter followers.

Before his role on the board was announced Tuesday, Musk was already flexing his fresh influence, asking Twitter users in a poll if they wanted to see the platform add an edit button – a function long desired by users but that the site has never implemented.

After his board term, which is set to run through 2024, was made public Tuesday, Musk hinted that he would be swiftly pushing for changes.

“Looking forward to working with Parag & Twitter board to make significant improvements to Twitter in coming months!” Musk said in a tweet, referring to Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal.

But while social media experts never would have expected Musk to take a backseat role in the operations of a social media platform for which he’s now the largest shareholder, they question just how much of an impact he will actually be able to make considering he’s still not in the driver’s seat of the organization.

His board seat certainly affords him a degree of influence, but Big Tech experts don’t expect Musk to parlay that into becoming the new CEO of Twitter anytime soon – mostly due to Musk’s preoccupations and interests in his other ventures, which include Tesla, SpaceX, and The Boring Company.

Tech and media expert Victoria Mendoza, who serves as CEO of MediaPeanut, an online digital media community, said Musk’s investment in Twitter shows he’s, at the very least, banking on an “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” strategy in order to have a “voice” in the company.

Mendoza also doesn’t see Musk taking over as the face of the platform, but she thinks he “definitely wants to be part of the decision-making process,” pointing out he’s unlikely to have “spent that much cash without wanting something out of it.”

She said Musk’s involvement “could provide a huge headache” for Agrawal if he puts pressure on the company to make changes to its controversial policies on free speech.

Publicly, Agrawal welcomed Musk to the board tweeting: “Through conversations with Elon in recent weeks, it became clear to us that he would bring great value to our Board.”

“He’s both a passionate believer and intense critic of the service which is exactly what we need on Twitter, and in the boardroom, to make us stronger in the long-term,” he added.

But experts question how cordial the relationship will remain.

Dallas-based marketing and big tech expert Adam Rizzieri noted that Musk’s decision to get involved in Twitter came after founder Jack Dorsey stepped down from the role of CEO and Agrawal took over.

He said that the move from Dorsey to Agrawal signaled “more of the same” was ahead when it comes to “censorship, unimpressive business growth, and more virtue signaling from a notably progressive, often hypocritical leadership team.”

Twitter has faced criticism from Musk and conservatives who feel the platform unfairly censors its content and users.

Last month, Twitter suspended the account of The Babylon Bee, a satirical site, for jokingly naming Rachel Levine, the transgender assistant secretary for health, “Man of the Year.”

The Babylon Bee’s CEO, Seth Dillon, tweeted that Musk contacted him about the suspension and even “mused on that call that he might need to buy Twitter.”

Rizzieri said Musk’s decision to invest in Twitter is his attempt to respond to a “societal pain.”

“This is typical of great entrepreneurs,” he said. “They start with a big problem and then reverse engineer the solution. Society’s problem is that mainstream social media companies unfairly censor free speech, and he believes he can solve that.”

Society’s problem is that mainstream social media companies unfairly censor free speech…

Musk’s move on Twitter was well received by conservatives, many of whom saw the investment as the key to stopping the censorship of right-leaning opinions – and potentially even reinstating former President Donald Trump to the platform. Trump was booted off Twitter following the breach of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, due to what the platform called a “risk of further incitement of violence.”

“Now that @ElonMusk is Twitter’s largest shareholder, it’s time to lift the political censorship,” tweeted Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo. “Oh… and BRING BACK TRUMP!”

But Twitter on Tuesday made it clear that it still has no plans to reinstate Trump’s account.

“Twitter is committed to impartiality in the development and enforcement of its policies and rules,” the company told the DailyMail. “Our policy decisions are not determined by the Board or shareholders, and we have no plans to reverse any policy decisions.

“As always our Board plays an important advisory and feedback role across the entirety of our service. Our day to day operations and decisions are made by Twitter management and employees.”

Whether or not Musk is ultimately able to end Trump’s Twitter exile, Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., tweeted that if Musk could “clean up Twitter and stop online censorship” he would be all for him “taking over the whole damn thing.”

And if Musk’s tweets are any indication of his plans, free speech policies appear to be a priority.

He publicly questioned Twitter’s free speech practices in several tweets on March 26. Musk even tweeted a poll on his Twitter account questioning whether Twitter unfairly censors speech.

“Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy,” he wrote. “Do you believe Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?”

An overwhelming majority, 70%, of the more than 2 million Twitter voters who chimed in, selected “no.”

Rizzieri believes that Musk’s financial interest in the company has to do with his belief that “free speech is essential” and “still cool.”

“Preserving free speech through social media is a means to an end for him,” Rizzieri said of Musk. “He needs innovation, collaboration, and communication to thrive and promote a marketplace of good ideas. Musk knows that social media plays a big role in facilitating conversations and, with this investment, he’ll promote freedom of speech because he’s passionate about it.”

While Musk’s vision for Twitter involves creating a “public sphere where you have free and open discussion,” Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, said that achieving that aim is much “easier said than done.”

“A free speech zone, no matter what, is still going to have limitations,” he said.

He points out that Dorsey had been a “huge proponent” of free speech from the platform’s inception, but his initial goals “didn’t happen because there’s a utopian view of what things can be and then there’s the reality.”

He said Musk will ultimately face the same realities that Dorsey encountered when he set out to create a platform that championed free speech, including the competing viewpoints of employees, other shareholders, and users.

And even with a board seat and huge financial stake, Selepak said Musk won’t necessarily be able to unilaterally decide to do things such as reinstating Trump’s account.

“I don’t think people realize that Musk having less than 10 percent of the stock is not going to be this earth-shattering change to the platform,” Selepak said. “Even if he is able to make changes, those changes are going to be limited by the engineers and moderators and everyone who works at the company who are still the same people.”

While Musk’s ability to influence Twitter’s internal operations remains up for debate, Selepak said Musk’s involvement has already had one major impact – it put Twitter “back in the news.”

After Trump was suspended from the platform, he said Twitter has been stagnant and was being overshadowed in the news by stories such as the debut of Trump’s Truth Social, the growth of TikTok, and the decline of Facebook.

“Twitter has not been the social media platform people have talked about,” he said. “People are using it, but not talking about it.”

Now that Musk is involved, he said “it’s going to be a news story and people are going to be talking about Twitter.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Adam Rizzieri Newsmax - Sanctions on Putin Russia-Ukraine War

Newsmax: Big Tech, Business Attempt to Punish Russia Could Backfire

Originally published on March. 11, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman

A flurry of multinational corporations and U.S.-based Big Tech companies have rushed to declare their own economic war on Russia to punish President Vladimir Putin for his invasion of Ukraine — but some experts fear the offensive will actually embolden the Kremlin.

Since the Ukraine invasion began three weeks ago, a growing number of Western companies spanning various sectors — banking, retail, entertainment, Big Tech — have suspended or completely severed their presence in Russia.

While a spate of stringent international sanctions and the closing of airspace to Russian planes has made it difficult for many companies to carry out business as usual in Russia anyway, Atlanta-based marketing and branding expert David Johnson said many companies opted to withdraw from the region to avoid being seen as supportive or even merely neutral amid the military conflict that’s earned Putin global scorn.

Businesses that opt to cut operations in Russia are currently backed by a majority of Americans and risk losing business in the U.S. and other Western countries if they don’t take a stand. According to a recent Morning Consult survey, more than 75% of Americans support corporations severing Russian business relations.

“As public pressure grows to pull out of the Russian market, businesses are balancing the desire to protect employees working in Russia against the reputational harm they may suffer by continuing to do business there,” said Wendy Patrick, an attorney, business law lecturer at San Diego State University, and Newsmax insider.

She points out that when a company decides to sever ties, it is weighing an impact felt by a “range of relevant stakeholders.”

“Contemporary brand management involves recognizing the risk that unpopular or politically incorrect corporate decisions go viral quickly, and can result in social media-fueled boycotts,” Patrick said.

But despite winning consumer support at home, Johnson fears that many companies’ departure from Russia will ultimately hurt ordinary people in the country, and possibly even embolden Putin as the nation loses access and connections to the West.

In response to the growing number of companies pulling out of Russia — a contingent that includes Disney, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Starbucks — Moscow has retaliated by banning U.S.-based social media companies Facebook and Twitter.

While Putin has managed to control nearly all facets of Russian society since taking charge two decades ago, political expression and non-state media reports could still be found on the internet. That access is fading, however, as Putin reacts to decisions made by TikTok, Netflix, Apple, Samsung, and Microsoft to say “dasvidania” to their business in Russia.

YouTube, which is owned by Google, blocked all Russian accounts from making money from their videos and barred Russian state television outlets from being shown across Europe. While YouTube and messaging app Telegram are still available, tech experts predict they could be the next communication apps tossed by Russian regulators.

“Russia is on course, right now, to be North Korea — that isolated,” Johnson said.

Dallas-based digital marketing and tech expert Adam Rizzieri said he agrees that by pulling American Big Tech out of Russia there is a chance that tensions could escalate.

Putin’s efforts to shut down the free press, however, have been “mostly futile,” with hackers interrupting Russian state television to share antiwar messaging and news of Russian war crimes against Ukrainians. Elon Musk has also chipped in, offering uncensored internet from space.

Rizzieri pointed out that, within hours of Russian missiles destroying Ukraine’s internet infrastructure, Musk’s Starlink service arrived on the ground within 48 hours of a Twitter request.

Without flexing a muscle, Musk used SpaceX to easily, publicly undermine Vladimir Putin,” he said. “Musk has shown how the private sector can be used to mock and undermine global tyrants.”

But if access to the West diminishes, some fear that Russians will fall further victim to Putin’s propaganda, with no other viewpoint present than one which blames the West – and which could ultimately weaken U.S. influence.

To compensate for the missing commerce, Rizzieri said Russia will ultimately develop “government-controlled initiatives” via a “parallel market to try and offer the same goods and services that we enjoy here in the U.S.”

He points out Russia already has Vkontakte, which is essentially just a copy of Facebook.

“Typically, the quality of a knock-off is substandard and the people always find a way to get the real thing,” Rizzieri said. “Somehow, even authentic Levi jeans found their way into Soviet Russia. Socialist markets always allow for a black market to bring in more desirable goods and services.”

Johnson believes companies were forced to take an early stand on the Ukraine conflict because it was “brought into everyone’s living room” via social media.

With the Biden administration initially slow to respond to the growing threat Russia posed to Ukraine, he said multinational companies faced increasing pressure to take a stand from other European countries where they have lucrative contracts.

Rizzieri believes that Ukraine was the “deal breaker” for businesses because the American public “knows that the Biden administration’s weakness makes them directly complicit.”

With Americans seeing a “strong, fearless” leader in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy – who is “standing up to what many see as an evil, calculated Vladimir Putin” – he said there is a desire to back Zelenskyy’s example of “strong” leadership.

The voluntary corporate withdrawal from Russia is also not unprecedented. In the 1980s, 200 major companies pulled out of South Africa in protest of apartheid. At the time, the U.S. slapped South Africa with congressional sanctions.

When a company decides whether to remove itself from a market over geopolitics, Johnson said they are calculating the cost of making an exit, which is why many of the companies that pulled out of Russia still have a presence in China, which has a long track record of committing human rights abuses against its Uyghur Muslim population.

But Rizzieri said the fact that the U.S. “business and political establishment continues to protect China and other countries with questionable track records is not OK.”

“The idea that Americans are comfortable buying oil from Iran is laughable,” he said. “Eventually the private sector has to stand up to the public sector and say ‘enough is enough.'”

But considering Russia is a “basket case for business,” while China boasts one of the “strongest economies,” Johnson said it is a much easier decision for a company to cut a minor loss by leaving the Russian market than to suffer a devastating blow by exiting China.

He said the biggest test will be how companies react if China decides to invade Taiwan.

While businesses are certainly aware of the egregious human rights violations taking place in China, he said “we don’t see [the abuses]” in the same way the Russian war has infiltrated social media feeds nationwide. That is partly because China is digitally isolated from the West, which is what is now taking place in Russia as Putin clamps down.

So, while Russia inspires companies to take a stand for human rights, it’s “business as usual” for businesses with a presence in Beijing.

“The big question is, if China goes into Taiwan, will these businesses do the same then?” Johnson said. “That’s when the rubber hits the road. If China invades Taiwan and their bottom line is affected, how do they react?”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

Adam Rizzieri Newsmax Russia Ukraine War

Newsmax: Big Tech Allows Russia-Ukraine Misinformation to Go Viral

Originally published on March. 02, 2022 at Newsmax.com, Written by Marisa Herman
Big Tech has emerged as a key player for Ukraine in the country’s bid to repel Russia’s invasion, as social media feeds throughout the world are flooded with dramatic images of bombed-out buildings, heroic troops, and resilient civilians.

But Big Tech companies aren’t just promoting news and images that are sympathetic to Ukraine’s plight. The organizations also have pushed to restrict pro-Russia news sites and censor what they consider blatant misinformation about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s attack.

And while the companies may have noble aims, social media experts say it’s also likely the platforms are inadvertently pushing inaccurate pro-Ukrainian propaganda that doesn’t depict the truth on the ground.

While popular social media apps such as Twitter and Facebook are based in the U.S., digital marketing expert Adam Rizzieri said the companies are effectively “no longer American” because they are “owned by international shareholders that only care about profit.”

“In the case of this Russia-Ukraine war, Big Tech has shareholders and users that represent both sides of the conflict,” he said. “So, when it comes to picking a side, they don’t choose Russia, Ukraine, or the United States. They quietly pick the side that aligns with their collective self-interest of making money.”

Rather than reveal a political or geographic bias, Rizzieri said the current conflict has exposed Big Tech’s “inability to make moral decisions related to geopolitical conflicts.”

So far, none of the U.S.-owned tech companies have banned Russian state media from using their platforms – the way in which several of them banned former President Donald Trump during his final weeks in office and beyond – and plenty of unverified pro-Ukrainian posts have gone viral, leaving users sifting through the posts appearing on their feeds to determine whether they are real or fake.

Just one week into the invasion, as social media platforms waffle over what to censor and misinformation has at times flown as fast and frequently as bullets. Andrew Selepak, a social media professor at the University of Florida, said fake or mislabeled posts and those lacking context are dangerous regardless of whether they have a pro-Russia or pro-Ukraine effect.

Because there is “no unifying voice” that “everyone is going to trust,” he said it will be difficult to understand exactly what is going on in Russia and Ukraine, especially because there is no direct U.S. involvement in the fighting.

Since it is very easy for the media to spin a good vs. evil or David vs. Goliath contest between Ukraine and Russia, Selepak said Big Tech companies are backing those portrayals. That could explain why far more pro-Ukrainian propaganda is infiltrating social media feeds – even if much of it isn’t true.

For instance, there have been multiple posts circulating that turned out to be dated or taken in other locations. Photos and videos taken during the 2014 Maidan protests in Ukraine have been recirculated on social media with claims that they depict the most recent Russian invasion, according to Reuters fact checkers.

The team found that the pics, which were posted as a collection of four images, show different scenes with a fiery backdrop. In two of the photos, people are throwing objects that are on fire. A third photo shows a man saluting with his middle finger. The last frame shows a person aiming a slingshot behind a barricade.

Similarly, footage of a military simulator video game, photos of explosions from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Gaza Strip, dated footage of heavy weaponry firing, and even aircraft animations have been shared as if they are representative of the Russian invasion.

Unverified news stories about the conflict are also going viral on social media. Selepak chalks that up to “confirmation bias,” in which people seek out the information that they want to find.

He pointed out that the sharing of heroic stories of Ukrainian troops, even if they aren’t true, “falls into the narrative of what we believe or what we want to believe, is more likely to spread.”

“We are coming into these stories with a bias we want to believe,” he said.

Conflicting accounts have made the case of the “Snake Island soldiers” confusing. The group of 13 defenders, who were reportedly killed after telling an approaching Russian warship to “go f*** yourself” turned out to be “alive and well,” according to the Ukrainian Navy.

But the deaths of the soldiers stationed on the tiny island in the Black Sea were so believed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the 13 soldiers on Snake Island all died “heroically” by Russian bombardment. The navy now claims that soldiers repelled two attacks by Russia before surrendering “due to the lack of ammunition.”

Hype around the “Ghost of Kyiv” – an alleged Ukrainian fighter pilot who is said to have shot down as many as 10 Russian planes – is almost sure to turn out false and is likely nothing more than an urban legend.

Photos and videos shared on social media of the ace supposedly in action are likely not authentic images of a Ukrainian MiG-29 fighter pilot. One post is actually footage from a video game and not footage of a Ukrainian airman shooting down a Russian fighter jet.

And as social media platforms appear to rally behind Ukrainian efforts, it wouldn’t be the first time that Big Tech has played a role in Ukraine’s future.

Many credit tweets made by Ukrainian activists and journalists for encouraging Ukrainians to participate in the 2014 Maidan protests, which were sparked by the Ukrainian government’s decision to suspend the signing of the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement. That decision led to closer ties with Moscow – but also soon inspired protests that ultimately led to 2014’s Revolution of Dignity.

“Seekers of truth cannot believe anything they read these days,” Rizzieri said. “They must seek information from a diversity of reliable sources and then use their best judgment accordingly.”

© 2022 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Catch Us In the Media

Agency Partner’s award-winning team often contributes expert opinions and perspectives on things that matter. Follow our contributions to the latest news and media topics or head over to the newly reinstated/uncancelled Agency Partner YouTube page to see us on TV and hear us on the radio or podcasts.

If your business is looking to utilize a digital marketing strategy or perhaps you need help with your web design and mobile needs, we’re happy to help! For no risk and no obligation, give us a shot!

Make the team at Agency Partner your next call.

big-tech-taking-over-small-business

Are Small Businesses at the Mercy of Big Tech?

Short Answer: Yes.

We all experience the web in different ways, but what happens when the web outsmarts us?

Where there’s a problem, there’s someone out there with a solution, or an idea of some magnitude that requires nurturing, maybe they need access to the right resources before they can move to the development phase. Big Tech offers that, and more; yet “Do they really?” is the question on Congress’ floor.

Over the last decade, there has been growing concern surrounding large tech companies and their anti-competitive practices, like buying out the small guy with rivaling potential. Why would a company as big as Facebook, for instance, need Instagram? Did they have a good enough reason for the merge, and can they prove their intentions weren’t to stifle the opposition?

The U.S. government is shifting that burden off of themselves and onto these tech titans, with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) spearheading the effort.

“When you start deliberately buying up what we call nascent competitors for the purpose of dominating the market, then you stop that innovation that might develop,” said the newly appointed chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Subcommittee. “No one has a chance of having a new product when they buy them all up and are the monopoly provider.”

Klobuchar’s bill seeks to revamp present antitrust laws that have been, in her perspective, ignoring the needs of the modern day consumer.

The Past

In truth, these laws were made decades and decades ago to combat the issue of corruption in business and politics. Big firms in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s would consolidate and form one giant entity called a “trust” company, an example of this being the oil industry that merged into Standard Oil Trust, or the tobacco industry coming together to represent the American Tobacco Company. As these enormous trusts banded together, so did their bank accounts.

The real problem wasn’t that they were rolling in dough, it was the threat that their partnership posed to entrepreneurship and competition, not to mention their growing influence over government affairs.

The Present

But where this concern once existed with retail, it has now permeated across a market that is digital, a territory that, to note, won’t be as easy to regulate, especially if Big Tech has also contributed to the success of many of those consumers.

Facebook makes for a good example as very recently the Federal Trade Commission and 48 attorneys general called for the tech giant to be broken up, alleging that the company was “suppressing, neutralizing, and deterring serious competitive threats” in order to establish more dominance online.

On the other hand and in their defense, Facebook has brought about much needed exposure to the smaller players, especially during the pandemic. If anything, the number of users soared as business owners everywhere were forced to get creative. There’s a whole hub of tools that the social network has made available, for free, from taking your store online to making consumer data work in your favor.

And studies from Pew Research Center report that roughly eight-in-ten adults go online daily, with three-in-ten of them being constantly plugged into the world of social media a reach that exists in plain, virtual view for anyone looking to capitalize on that. It gets more tedious when we factor in the role that artificial intelligence plays in accessing, storing, even selling consumer data.

As Big Tech continues to expand, so does their power and influence over the individual and the economy:

Consider the effects that a casual tweet from the “Technoking” Elon Musk had over the market back in February, to be able to make money with “One word: Doge.”

Or consider Amazon, and the convenience it brings for both buyers and sellers everywhere. For the consumer, there are more options and cheaper buys; for retailers, there are cuts to overhead costs and the hassle-free experience of delivery. It’s an empowering platform, until, as critics of the retail giant bring up, the math paints a different story.

According to a study done by ProPublica in 2016, Amazon’s search engine algorithm was set up to bury bargains from independent merchants and utilize sales data to decide which products to create their own versions of, ultimately competing with the very sellers that operated on the platform.

The Effects On SMBs

Scott Galloway, a professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business and author of The Four, a book about digital monopolies, warns of this developing concentration of power that Big Tech has and how it’s the reason for “infanticide” in small firms. “If they’re not stopping (innovation), they’re the main cause behind the slowdown in American startup creation.”

While Congress has been more willing to have the conversation, the pace at which technology is taking over has only accelerated. Some would argue that this gap between inaction and action, respectively, is increasingly killing the economy. By the time any legislation is passed, statistics suggest there’ll be more casualties on the enterprise front.

Maybe another question to consider here is whether there needs to be any government intervention at all.

When these leading tech companies are offering immediate access to vast markets, ability to target ads, budget-friendly and reliable infrastructure, why would startups want to look anywhere else when the framework has already been laid out for them? Developers can reach hundreds of millions of customers overnight via Apple’s and Google’s app store; brands can rent out Amazon’s and Google’s cloud-computing power; Facebook and Instagram might be the smoothest, cost-effective marketing tool in the history of everdom.

That also explains why Congress has yet to come to a consensus over this matter; it’s no easy feat to go against Big Tech, and then there’s the problem of whether our legislators are intellectually equipped to be making those decisions for users of technology.

The Future

One thing is for certain: the small business owner can use more support.

Is the answer here to break companies up? Should they be prevented from buying out up-and-coming ventures, just because they have the capital to do so? Whatever comes of the resolution, Klobuchar’s antitrust bill may be a better place to start than any.

For a market to remain a breeding ground for exploration and innovation, it’s essential that there’s the room and the resources there to foster those ideas.

It might be safe to say that Big Tech is much like that room, a Pandora’s box that’s full of the bells and whistles that appeal to many of its clients, but a box is also just a box: it’s restrictive. And Klobucar’s proposal to put more resources toward smaller agencies could be the backbone that the entrepreneurial spirit of today needs.

As she puts it,

“You can’t take on trillion dollar companies with bandaids and duct tape.”

Work With A Reputable Web Agency

Agency Partner Interactive is a world-renowned web agency that empowers many of its users to lead with more autonomy in the field. To learn more about how we can help you, call us today at 214-295-5845 or contact Agency Partner for more information.