FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 27, 2022

CONTACT: Ashley Woolheater woolheater@openmarketsinstitute.org

In response to Elon Musk buying Twitter Open Markets Institute Director Barry Lynn issues the following statement:

WASHINGTON- "The Open Markets Institute believes Elon Musk’s deal to buy Twitter poses a number of immediate and direct threats to American democracy, free speech, and national security. Open Markets believes the deal violates existing law and that the Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) each have ample authority to block it. We also believe the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Department of Defense (DOD), and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) each have a duty to vet this takeover closely.

The most obvious problem is that the deal would give to one man – who already wields enormous economic and political power – direct control over one of world’s most important platforms for public communications and debate. As has been true from the Founding, the American people have both an absolute right and responsibility to regulate all essential public communications infrastructure to ensure its full openness and neutrality, and freedom from foreign influence.

And let’s be clear, Elon Musk is no run-of-the-mill billionaire. In recent months he has repeatedly meddled in delicate foreign policy issues in ways that demonstrate a seeming disregard for the security of the United States and its closest allies in a time of war and economic conflict. This includes shutting down his Starlink satellite system in certain parts of Ukraine, in ways that appear to support Russian and Chinese interests and demands. And it includes undermining U.S. policy on Taiwan at a moment when China is threatening to invade or blockade that island. In reporting these actions, the New York Times this week described Musk as a “geopolitical chaos agent.”

Then there’s the fact that Musk has exploited Twitter and other communications platforms to engage in fraudulent misrepresentations of his own businesses, as he admitted in 2018 in a settlement with the SEC. And just this week Reuters reported that the DOJ is investigating Tesla for fraudulent statements about its autopilot system.

Specific to domestic communications, Musk’s statements on Twitter’s regulation of its own platform show a basic misunderstanding of how the United States protects freedom of expression. In addition to using our antimonopoly laws to prevent concentrations of power over communications, speech, debate, and news, Americans also use both private and public regulation to ensure platforms are not used to promote violence or spread dangerous disinformation, as Donald Trump used Twitter to do.

 One way law enforcers can move swiftly to block Musk’s takeover of Twitter is to focus on his existing ownership of Starlink. As its use in Ukraine demonstrates, Starlink has become one the most important communications platforms in the world. Since the late 19th Century, the U.S. government has routinely acted to ensure the separation of essential platforms. This includes the 1913 order to AT&T to spin off Western Union, the 1956 consent decree with AT&T that blocked a move into publishing, and most recently, the DOJ’s 2017 attempt to block AT&T’s takeover of Time-Warner (an effort which failed only because the DOJ filed a poor case, as OMI made clear at the time). Just as we would now expect law enforcers to block a takeover of Twitter by Google, Facebook, Comcast, or Verizon, the same rules apply to the owners of Starlink.

 Elon Musk’s effort to buy Twitter is not the only threat to free communications and debate in the United States. The size, scope, and business models of Google, Amazon, and Facebook also pose a wide variety of threats to American democracy and the basic rights of citizens. That’s why law enforcers and Congress should also view this deal as a big step towards eliminating all business models that rely on the manipulation of communications, commerce, and debate." 

Lynn also commented in April on Musk’s initial plans to purchase the social media site, outlining why the deal would both pose risks to democracy and free speech and violate existing antitrust law. Since then Musk’s reckless engagement in national security matters has made it even more clear why the public must block his effort to capture control over this essential public communications platform

###

The Open Markets Institute is a team of journalists, researchers, lawyers, economists, and advocates working together to expose and reverse the stranglehold that corporate monopolies have on our country.