Thread by @ljin18

One way to view what's happening at Twitter today is not only as an organizational reshuffling and effort to reinvigorate product & revenues — but as a platform in the midst of a legitimacy crisis.

In a piece last year by me & @kplikethebird, we built upon historical & sociological analysis of political legitimacy to examine tech platforms’ legitimacy in the eyes of creators & users.

li.substack.com/p/legitimacy-l…

First, what is legitimacy? Vitalik called legitimacy "a pattern of higher-order acceptance." For Aristotle, legitimacy is rooted in justice.

German sociologist Max Weber theorized three basic sources of legitimacy, which are also useful for analyzing the platform economy:

1 - Traditional legitimacy — essentially, rule by status quo. "Follow me, because it’s always been done this way."

2 - Charismatic legitimacy — in other words, rule by cult of personality. "Follow me, because I’m charming and compelling."

3 - Rational-legal legitimacy — in other words, rule by rationality. "Follow me, because the system of rules and laws I’ve built are clear and objectively make society run better."

Most platform companies originally derived their legitimacy through charismatic origins: the founder CEOs built auras around themselves as tech geniuses and philosopher kings, and product decisions flowed from that.

There’s also a traditional source of legitimacy at play: because platforms are companies, they could operate themselves as they saw fit — as companies historically have always done.

More recently, as users became more vocal and issues of platform governance became more contentious, platforms have sought to build their legitimacy through rational-legal means — legitimacy through a system of rules and laws that everyone understands and agrees to.

In doing so, they’ve built up terms of service, "objective" algorithms, and "oversight boards" that are akin to private legal systems. In theory, these rules are intended to protect everyone and maintain community health for all.
oversightboard.com

But over time, cracks in the social contract between platforms and their users started to show, as platforms' rules were exposed to be arbitrary, ever-changing, and determined autocratically.

Countless examples like the policy changes that led to YouTube’s Adpocalypse, OnlyFans’ ban of explicit content, or Apple’s restrictive App Store policies have all led to an erosion of legitimacy that strains users’ trust in the platforms.

https://twitter.com/ljin18/status/1427822936451338241

That leads to today, and Twitter.

While debates rage about the $8/mo verification subscription & the extent of Twitter's moderation — all these changes can be viewed as attempts to re-establish legitimacy and better align the platform with the will of its users & stakeholders.

Musk may have the most charismatic legitimacy of any tech CEO, given his cult of personality. But going forward, that alone isn’t sufficient.

There needs to be rational-legal legitimacy in order to cultivate higher-order acceptance by the entirety of its user base that represents a wide range of values and interests.

Rather than making product and policy decisions unilaterally, Twitter's legitimacy can be enhanced by inviting stakeholders into the decision-making process, which would also give creators, users, & advertisers the opportunity to participate in decisions that impact the business.

One small-scale example of this happening elsewhere is Airbnb’s Host Advisory Board, composed of 18 hosts who regularly convene with company leadership to influence host-related policies, programs, and products.

airbnb.com/d/hostadvisory…

Another way to enhance legitimacy might be to give users more control over their own experiences on the platform: to choose the extent to which the content in their feed is moderated or fact-checked, or even to be able to export and transfer their data to other products.

True user consent, and legitimacy, occurs when they are able to participate in systems from a place of freedom and agency rather than data-driven lock-in.

Legitimacy crises usually get resolved in one of two ways: either the regime realigns their rule with the interests of their community, or the system is overthrown and a new one is put in place that better aligns the interests of the people with those in power.

The latter path could very much happen: in tech, new upstarts are always vying to inherit the users who feel dissatisfaction with existing products.

Twitter is a company that has played a pivotal role in effecting cultural and political change throughout the world.

Today it’s in the midst of a revolution itself, and legitimacy is a useful lens to characterize and analyze this period.

More thoughts on the legitimacy crisis brewing in the creator economy from last year, and how I see it unfolding (into more democratic and decentralized alternatives):

https://twitter.com/ljin18/status/1448718984262660099