Elon Musk has a well-documented history of proposing bold and often contentious changes for X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, only to either abandon them or implement them very slowly. A notable example is Musk’s proposal from nearly a year ago to eliminate the ability to block users—a change that could have transformed the platform into an even more chaotic environment. Despite this announcement, the change has not yet been executed, and if it ever is, there is no guarantee that it will remain permanent.
Musk’s latest plan involves making likes on posts anonymous, visible only to the original poster and the person who liked the post. Musk and his engineering team claim that this update is intended to promote free expression. Musk argues that it’s crucial to allow people to like posts without the fear of being attacked for their choices. His director of engineering supports this by stating that public likes incentivize the wrong behavior; for example, many users feel discouraged from liking ‘edgy’ content out of fear of retaliation or to protect their public image.
Critics, however, find this rationale to be unconvincing. They argue that concealing the identities of those who like posts is not truly about adhering to one’s convictions. Instead, it allows individuals to express approval of a post without having to publicly defend their stance. This move appears to cater to users who cannot handle the social backlash that might come from indicating a belief. If users are uncomfortable with publicly expressing their approval, they could simply choose not to like the post.
The underlying motive behind this change might be more troubling. It’s plausible that this decision is driven by the overwhelming presence of spam, bots, and platform manipulation on X. By hiding the identities of those who like posts, Musk is making it easier to obscure the true extent of this problem.
Likes on social media serve two main functions. First, they inform the platform about user preferences, allowing the platform to tailor content and advertisements more effectively. Second, they enable users to express appreciation or approval, thereby facilitating online community building. In this way, likes function as a digital nod or a pat on the back. Most platforms honor the social utility of likes. For instance, on Instagram, users can see who liked a post unless the poster has chosen to hide this information. Similarly, LinkedIn and TikTok provide transparency regarding who has liked content. Reddit, however, keeps upvotes private, but anonymity is an integral part of Reddit’s culture, and each subreddit has moderators to enforce rules and prevent antisocial behavior.
In contrast, Musk’s X lacks the necessary infrastructure and motivation to prevent antisocial behavior. Upon taking over Twitter in late 2022, Musk drastically reduced the content moderation staff. While this decision saved the company millions of dollars, it also significantly compromised the user experience. The most noticeable problem has been the increase in spam. Automated accounts promoting dubious content, such as crypto scams and explicit material, have become ubiquitous in replies and direct messages.
Advertising on X has also suffered considerably. Major advertisers began to flee when Musk took over, wary of the new direction of the platform. While some have returned, Musk’s frequent controversial actions often drive them away again. As a result, X appears to have fewer active users now than before Musk’s acquisition, leading to less engagement with advertisements. The ads that do appear are often of low quality. For instance, instead of seeing ads for major brands like Disney or Marvel movies, users are more likely to encounter ads for obscure crypto products. With fewer engaged users, the return on investment for advertisers declines. By making likes anonymous, Musk might be attempting to mask this lack of genuine engagement.
The same logic applies to other forms of manipulation. For instance, foreign governments have used X to conduct influence campaigns. By concealing who likes a post, it becomes easier to hide these activities. Politicians and pundits can also create the illusion of widespread support for their ideas by manipulating like counts. Public visibility of likes served as a check against such manipulation, but Musk’s changes remove this barrier.
Musk’s inconsistent stance on platform manipulation further complicates the issue. Initially, he expressed a desire to eliminate spam bots, citing them as a reason for acquiring Twitter. Later, when attempting to back out of the deal, he paradoxically cited the prevalence of inauthentic accounts as a reason. Selling blue verification badges was supposed to ensure user authenticity, but instead, it made the platform more unreliable. Hiding the identities of those who like posts is just another step towards making X more opaque and less trustworthy.
In summary, Musk’s plan to anonymize likes on X is fraught with issues. While it is presented as a move to encourage free expression and protect users, it seems more likely to facilitate spam, bots, and platform manipulation. This change could further degrade user experience and erode trust in the platform.