Social Media Analyst Critiques City of Ottawa's Decision to Remain on Platform X
Communications professor Sandra Robinson from Carleton University, who specializes in social platforms and hate speech, has expressed concerns about the City of Ottawa's continued presence on platform X, owned by Elon Musk. Despite a motion from Orléans West-Innes Coun. Laura Dudas failing to pass at the city's Finance and Corporate Services Committee, Ottawa will remain active on the platform.
"Even though a city may want to maximize its outreach, there are valid concerns when it comes to being on X," Robinson explained. "If a platform is taken over by specific kinds of extremist ideas, being on that platform sends a signal that you might support those extreme views."
The problem lies in that, on a platform like X, the city doesn't have full control over how its own posts will circulate. According to Robinson, there's a large proportion of users on X who hold extremist views, and they may respond in ways that are inappropriate to the city's content.
Political science professor Scott Matthews of Memorial University of Newfoundland discusses the complexities of government communication through social media platforms. He acknowledges the City of Ottawa's dilemma, stating, "I think people might want us to pull the plug on any association with Trump-related entities, and they might view Musk in that light."
Matthews explained that initially, governments felt the need to be on as many platforms as possible to reach as many people as they could. However, he believes that times have changed, and governments must now make calculated decisions about which platforms are conducive to reaching their constituents effectively.
Several other Canadian cities, including Calgary, have already left X, with their social media teams citing the need to turn off comments and stop advertising on the platform. Some Canadian cities, including the Supreme Court of Canada, have also chosen to abandon X.
Matthews questions the constituency that remains on X, arguing, "Is X becoming like Truth Social, not a place for the general public, but for a particular, conservative public?"
Robinson reiterates her concerns about the nature of X's current environment, stating that the platform's owner, Elon Musk, has publicly declared it as a "free absolutist space" where hate speech and misinformation can spread unchecked. Robinson added, "Content moderation on X is non-existent, which makes it a challenging platform for governments to use responsibly."
Five members of Ottawa city council voted in support of moving off X, while seven cast their votes for staying for now. One council member, Riley Brockington, defended the city's decision by saying, "Although I don't support much of what I see on X, I will certainly defend people's right to become members, to use it or not to use it. I think we have concerns with the type of content that exists on X, but what is our role?"
Robinson acknowledges the council's reasoning, but she also warns that X may become more problematic as time goes on. "Given the threats against Canada by Trump and Musk, I do believe that if ever there was a time to quit X, this would be it."
Matthews remains skeptical about the solution being Bluesky, another social media platform. While Robinson believes the city could operate in "parallel" on both X and Bluesky, there are concerns about the potential for Bluesky to become problematic as well.
As governments reassess their use of social media platforms, it appears that diversifying beyond X to focus on higher-engagement platforms and owned channels may be a strategic move for building trust within communities. However, maintaining a limited presence on X may still be necessary for audiences reliant on the platform, provided robust monitoring and moderation systems are in place.
- Professor Sandra Robinson from Carleton University has expressed concerns about the City of Ottawa's continued presence on platform X, owned by Elon Musk, due to its association with extremist ideas.
- The City of Ottawa's dilemma regarding its continued presence on platform X is discussed by political science professor Scott Matthews, who suggests governments must make calculated decisions about which platforms are conducive to reaching their constituents effectively.
- Others, such as the Supreme Court of Canada, have already abandoned platform X, citing concerns about the nature of the platform and the need to turn off comments and stop advertising.
- Professor Matthews questions whether X is becoming a platform for a conservative public, similar to Truth Social, and wonders about the constituency that remains on the platform.
- Robinson points out the issue with X's current environment, as its owner, Elon Musk, has publicly declared it as a "free absolutist space" where hate speech and misinformation can spread unchecked.
- City council member Riley Brockington defended the city's decision to remain on platform X, arguing that it is important to defend people's right to use it while acknowledging concerns about the type of content that exists on the platform.
- Robison acknowledges the council's reasoning but warns that X may become more problematic as time goes on, particularly given the threats against Canada by Trump and Musk.
- Matthews remains skeptical about the solution being Bluesky, another social media platform, and shares concerns about its potential to become problematic as well.
- As governments reassess their use of social media platforms, a strategic move for building trust within communities could involve diversifying beyond X to focus on higher-engagement platforms and owned channels, while maintaining a limited presence on X with robust monitoring and moderation systems in place.
