Estimated read time: 7-8 minutes
SALT LAKE CITY — "Quick, while it's just us, let's abolish the filibuster."
That was the first post sent by Pennsylvania's Democratic Sen. John Fetterman after joining Meta's recently-launched Twitter rival, Threads. Fetterman was referencing a policy popular among progressive Democrats, but he was also one of several seemingly disaffected Twitter users who were relishing in the online space.
"Quick, while it's still nice here, (ask me anything)," posted Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.
Meanwhile, conservatives on Twitter expressed their fondness for that platform since Elon Musk took over last fall, at the same time criticizing Meta for its moderation policies on platforms like Instagram and Facebook, which they have consistently accused of censoring conservatives.
"If you are looking to have your speech censored and your data pillaged, then Mark Zuckerberg has an app for you," tweeted Stephen Miller, a former senior adviser and speechwriter to then-President Donald Trump.
Threads isn't devoid of conservative users, though. Donald Trump Jr. and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, have created accounts, and right wing commentator Jack Posobiec quickly issued a series of posts disparaging transgender individuals and falsely claiming Trump won the 2020 election.
The idea that Threads would become a liberal version of Twitter sounds "bizarre" to Jim Tabery, a philosophy professor at the University of Utah who teaches a class on misinformation and closely follows social media.
"I mean, it's not like it's being run by Cornel West or Bernie Sanders," he told KSL.com. "It's Meta, it's (Mark) Zuckerberg, this is not a person or a company who's been at the leading edge of liberal causes. I think all this hype about Threads is (that) it's not Twitter."
But the preference for Threads or Twitter does reveal a difference in what users want from a content moderation standpoint, with some eager to try a new platform in hopes it will do more to curb disinformation and hate speech, and others opting for the free-wheeling, anything goes approach embraced by Musk's Twitter.
'A more positive environment'
Ben Anderson is one of those early adopters of Threads, and has posted there regularly over the few days it has been operational. Anderson, communications director for the Utah Democratic Party, said Threads has been a more welcoming platform compared to the "cesspool" Twitter has become under Musk.
"(Twitter) has definitely become a less inviting place. There's a lot more hateful content out there," he told KSL.com. "There's really bad stuff. It's a place where pretty much anything goes for right-wing nuts, and I think that's been Elon Musk's goal: to pander to them. But it's definitely not the same as it was a year ago."
Instagram head Adam Mosseri said in a post he isn't interested in replacing Twitter, but said the goal of Threads is to "create a public square for communities on Instagram that never fully embraced Twitter and for communities on Twitter (and other platforms) that are interested in a less angry place for conversations."
Anderson said he wants to be able to engage with those who disagree with him, and he didn't embrace Threads in hopes of avoiding conservatives. Rather, he hopes Threads will better moderate hate speech and protect users from bad actors, while still providing space for intellectual discussions and disagreement.
He's seen more instances of Twitter users openly using racial or homophobic slurs without being punished recently, which "wasn't the norm before."
"I think there's definitely a place for disagreement, but when that crosses into hate speech and personal targeting and threatening, I think that's a problem," he said.
But even if some speech crosses that line, Utah state Rep. Trevor Lee, R-Layton, said the platforms themselves shouldn't be the ones policing it. Thanks to the reach of social media, he told KSL.com, bad behavior can be shared more easily and people can collectively punish those who break social norms by spreading hate speech and other offensive content.
"I think, essentially what it gets down to, you should technically be allowed to discriminate if you want, but then there's going to be consequences if you do so, and that's because of technology," he said.
That approach means people will have to wade through some muck, he acknowledged, but he prefers it to one where companies or governments limit the kinds of things people can post.
Musk's policies at Twitter — specifically one allowing anyone to receive a verified blue check by paying $8 per month — have translated to "a lot more muck on Twitter," Anderson said, adding that he believes the company's previous regime was moderating posts based on content that violated the rules, not based on ideology.
"If you're being quote-unquote 'censored' by moderation policies that don't allow hateful content and hate speech, you should maybe take a step back and reflect on what you're putting out there," he said. "I've definitely felt like (Threads) has been a more positive environment, which has been nice."
Is there a right amount of moderation?
Lee said he doesn't plan to open a Threads account anytime soon because he sees the platform as biased toward liberals, though he isn't rooting for a mass exodus of liberals from Twitter, either.
"I started a Truth Social account when it first came out, and I didn't like it, because it is an echo chamber," he said of the platform created by Trump as a conservative alternative to Twitter. "I like seeing what the other side believes on an issue, and I think most people like it, too. I don't believe it's good that everything is so polarized."
But short of Zuckerberg announcing that Threads won't "censor" any content or sell user data, he doesn't see anything that would entice him to join, although he says he uses Facebook and Instagram infrequently to share things with his family and close friends.
On the other hand, Anderson said platforms should at least be willing to ban the most obvious forms of hate speech and targeting.
"You're never going to get it 100% right, but I think that it can definitely get to a point where people feel like the platform is an inviting place to go," he said.
There's been a "greater proliferation of nonsense" on Twitter since Musk's takeover, Tabery said, and for the most part, "people have sort of learned how to navigate that if they want to be on Twitter."
Liberals haven't been completely satisfied with Threads' moderation either, saying it doesn't do enough to prevent anti-LGBTQ posts — highlighting the difficulty in satisfying everyone on a platform.
Is Threads a threat to Twitter?
Threads isn't the first platform to try to emulate Twitter's success, and the previous iterations have remained niche at best. Even platforms that had the backing of powerful companies, such as Google+, eventually fizzled, Tabery pointed out.
"As it turns out, just because a company does one thing well doesn't mean it will do another well," he said. "You might think that because Meta does well with Instagram and Facebook, Threads is just going to be another version of that. ... I'm not convinced."
That's because Twitter — despite its recent changes — remains the dominant cultural force where politicians, activists, athletes and artists are all in one place. Even Trump, who has remained faithful to posting only on Truth Social after being reinstated on Twitter, is a mainstay on the platform because people regularly screenshot his posts to share with the wider Twitterverse.
Without a broader disruption of social media, the same would likely be true of anyone who decides to post only on Threads, Tabery argued.
Threads' debut with tens of millions of downloads is impressive, he said, but that is helped by the fact that Instagram users can quickly transfer their accounts to the new platform. Only time will tell if they decide to make it part of their social media retinue.
Tabery is certain of one thing, though: If Musk and Zuckerberg decide to settle their differences through a much-speculated cage fight, it will get a lot of attention, and not just on Twitter and Threads.
"Even the idea that you might have these two knuckleheads — it's just too good to be true that they would think this is the format in which they will settle, you know, who's the best billionaire," he said.
"I've never paid for pay-per-view, but I would pay for that."
