X Has Become a 'Global Sewer,' Mayor of Paris Says
Calling X (formerly Twitter) a “global sewer” has reignited long‑running arguments over whether the platform was always toxic or has sharply deteriorated under Elon Musk’s ownership. Commenters contrast Musk’s looser moderation, algorithmic promotion of inflammatory “blue check” content and legal attacks on critics with earlier eras of heavier safety and policy enforcement, debating whether this represents a gain for free expression or a collapse in basic governance. The thread also questions the motives of political figures criticizing X, notes advertisers and users leaving over extremist content, and points to fragmentation into smaller or alternative platforms as a possible escape from large, engagement‑driven social networks.
Was Twitter/X Always a “Sewer”?
- Many argue Twitter was toxic long before Musk; what’s changed is the type and volume of “sewage.”
- Others say it is “objectively worse now” due to disbanded safety teams, reinstated banned accounts, and culture-war posting from the owner.
- Some report that valuable expert communities (e.g., science, policy niches) still exist but require carefully avoiding trends, “For You,” and viral posts.
Algorithms, Blue Checks, and User Experience
- Widespread criticism that algorithmic feeds (“For You”) surface low‑quality, inflammatory, or spammy content; replies on popular posts are called especially bad.
- Blue-checks are described as going from a rough credibility signal to a marker of low‑quality or bot‑like engagement, with claims of reply trees used for monetization and even alleged money laundering.
- Others counter that their experience is good when using “Following,” muting, and “not interested,” and that the feed can be highly relevant if curated well.
Free Speech, Moderation, and Lawsuits
- Supporters call X the best remaining social platform, praising broad speech tolerance, access to divergent political views, and Community Notes.
- Critics say “free speech” is selective:
- Increased responsiveness to government takedown requests is cited.
- Legal action (e.g., against Media Matters) is framed by some as an attempt to chill criticism rather than correct inaccuracy.
- Claims of inconsistent moderation: slurs and extremist content reportedly allowed, while terms like “cis” or “decolonization” are sometimes penalized, with debate over whether the latter inherently implies genocide.
- There is disagreement over whether previously “right‑wing” or contrarian views (COVID policies, immigration, IQ) were systematically suppressed and are now freer, or whether this is overstated.
Comparisons, Alternatives, and Broader Context
- Some see X as still preferable to Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or Threads; others argue that all major social platforms are “sewers,” and suggest niche forums or smaller communities instead.
- A longer reflection blames the tweet/short‑form model itself for encouraging decontextualized outrage and propaganda, and argues that functioning democratic debate requires context, good‑faith actors, and active moderation.
On the Paris Mayor’s Critique
- A subset links her “global sewer” comment to a domestic scandal over an expensive Tahiti trip revealed on Twitter, suggesting self‑interest and deflection rather than principle.