Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin expressed support for Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, but questioned the positive impact from the transfer of media platforms to billionaires’ ownership in general.

Don’t be against Elon’s management of twitter (at least compared to the status quo), but I disagree with the more general enthusiasm for wealthy people/organizations that hostile take over social media companies. This could easily go *very* wrong (imagine, for example, an ethically challenged foreign government doing this) https://t.co/LDqjXh3xCK

— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) April 15, 2022

According to Buterin, in the presence of low barriers, hostile takeovers can discipline management. But that may not work for the media, especially when it comes to social media. They have an extremely high level of influence, but generally low monetization and relatively low capitalization make them a target for these types of transactions.

In the social media example this is particularly bad because media platforms often combine very high levels of influence with low monetization (and very low market cap -> cheap to achieve)

— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) April 15, 2022

Buterin suggested imagining an option for Saudi Crown Prince Alwaleed bin Talal to increase his Twitter share from 5% to 50%. The co-founder of Ethereum emphasized that in this case, the leader of the country with “ethical issues” will have much more influence on the policy of the platform than the growth of his stake in the company.

The “But this Saudi guy already has 5%” score is well-understood, but ultimately poor imo. Control is super linear in ownership stake. The level of ability to control the policy is currently very low and will increase by *very* 10x if ownership increases to 50%.

— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) April 16, 2022

Twitter has a “public good”, according to Buterin. The platform must not be controlled by power structures.

I personally view Twitter as a public service, while there are many good reasons why this “public” should not be represented by any government. So the challenge…

— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) April 15, 2022

The Ethereum co-founder was backed by Twitter founder Jack Dorsey.

the same

— jack⚡️ (@jack) April 16, 2022

Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao suggested that the “poison pill” proposed by the platform’s board of directors for Elon Musk may not be in the interests of investors.

That’s how capitalism works, right? On the other hand, “poison pill” doesn’t sound fair. The board seems to maintain itself (power/control) over the interests of all investors. Anyway, I’m sure there’s more to it than appears on the surface.

— CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) April 16, 2022

Recall that the plan, approved by the board of directors of the platform, gives shareholders the right to purchase additional shares at a discount if any organization or person buys at least 15% of Twitter securities without the approval of the board of directors.

Musk had previously become the company’s largest shareholder, buying a 9.2% stake for $2.89 billion. He launched an initiative to reduce the cost of his Twitter Blue subscription and add payment in Dogecoin (DOGE).

On April 14, Musk offered to buy Twitter for more than $43 billion, explaining this not out of a desire to monetize but to create an “inclusive arena for free speech.”