How should we interact as a society, debate and make decisions? What drives politicians to focus and act on certain issues and not others? These questions are central in a world where figures like Elon Musk They are transforming public debate into a terrain of polarization and manipulation. This is the proposition of Peter Pomerantsev, Author of How to Win an Information War: The Propagandist Who Outwitted Hitlerin an article published in The Guardian.
Throughout history, different systems and platforms have attempted to mediate social conversations. The Athenians had the agora, a space where citizens (male slave owners) debated the issues of the day. In the 20th century, the founder of the BBC, John Reithconceived the medium as a place to foster democratic values and promote debate among British people. However, today, these ideas have been disrupted by the rise of social media and the power of entrepreneurs like Musk.
Musk, owner of the platform x (formerly known as Twitter), has not only used its position to influence public discoursebut also to intervene directly in politics. Last week, Musk called the British Protection Minister, Jess Phillipsas an “apologist for genocide by rape” and accused the prime minister, Keir Starmerof being “complicit in the rape of Great Britain.” These statements, shared with his 211 million followers, were not limited to media noise. According to Pomerantsev, they forced political reactions: the government announced hasty measures, and conservatives demanded a national investigation into sexual exploitation rings, ignoring their failure to address the problem for years while they were in power.
It is not the first time that Musk intervenes in political matters. During race riots in England last summer, he questioned why Starmer was not protecting all races, while X was filled with misinformation and far-right agitators spread falsehoods, such as the accusation that a refugee had murdered local youth. These actions seem part of a campaign to destabilize the prime minister, and the question arises: to what extent is Musk coordinating with figures like donald trump? According to the expert’s article, Trump’s vice president, J.D. Vancehinted that the United States would reconsider its security guarantees to Europe if European governments attempt to regulate X.
Pomerantsev points out that Technology has profoundly transformed the public sphere. Although lies in politics are not new, the internet and social networks have created unprecedented systems of amplification and manipulation. Platforms like X use opaque algorithms to decide what content to display, exploiting users’ personal data to manipulate their fears, desires and opinions. This raises a critical question: can the technology that has disrupted our public conversations be used to strengthen democracy?
The concept of “public sphere” has been romantically idealized by philosophers such as Jurgen Habermaswho pointed out the emergence of this space in 18th century England, where an emerging bourgeoisie debated politics in cafes and read pamphlets that influenced political parties. However, this ideal was always imperfect, controlled by elites and distorted by private interests, such as those of the press barons of the 20th century.
When the internet emerged, it was believed that it would be a democratizing tool. The initial blogs looked like modern pamphlets, where anyone could express themselves and participate in global debates. However, social networks centralized this process. A handful of companies and their algorithms—represented by figures like Musk and Mark Zuckerberg— now control information, dictating what we see and how we interpret it.
Musk, according to Pomerantsev, does not operate only for profit, like Zuckerberg, but also to satisfy his personal interests. Some see him as an ideological heir to Cecil Rhodestrying to build a right-wing English-speaking empire on social media. Musk, born in South Africa and of Canadian and English heritage, cannot aspire to the presidency of the United States, but seems determined to dominate the digital landscape.
Musk’s actions on social media don’t just affect British politics. In the United States, their tactics align with the phenomenon of politics Maga (Make America Great Again), where social media-fueled conspiracies are the norm. Election officials who challenged false claims of fraud in the 2020 election faced harassment, and traditional media, unable to compete with social media, have lost influence.
For Pomerantsev, the answer cannot be limited to regulating individual posts on social networks. The essential thing is to demand radical transparency. Platforms must disclose how their algorithms work: do they promote certain political perspectives? Do they incentivize campaigns to subvert electoral integrity or mitigate violent speech? What are you doing to protect children from online exploitation?
In Europe, new European Union laws require independent researchers to access data from these companies, something the United States has not yet implemented. This lack of regulation leaves citizens at the mercy of the interests of technology CEOs, without tools to understand how they are manipulated.
Beyond regulation, Pomerantsev suggests that we need platforms designed to foster constructive dialogue, not polarization. It proposes that governments finance public digital spaces, similar to libraries or plazas, where the rules of interaction are clear and transparent. In the United States, some scholars have suggested a tax on for-profit social media to fund civic alternatives.
Additionally, a new type of journalism is needed that confronts conspiracy theories and misinformation at their root: people’s sense of alienation. Media that acts as a social service, responding to the frustrations and abandonment felt by communities.
To compete with the manipulation of figures like Musk, we need to update our democratic institutions and build a digital ecosystem that prioritizes the public interest over the profit and personal obsessions of the powerful. As the author notes: “Until we lift the veil that hides the operations of Musk and Zuckerberg, our society will continue to function in the dark, shaped by invisible forces.”
