The intersection between the Buffalo mass shooting and its related online content provides more evidence that the lines between free speech, dangerous speech and unlawful speech are blurring at the speed of a keystroke.
It’s believed that 4Chan, the anonymous imageboard popular with far-right users, helped spoon-feed the “great replacement” theory (which suggests that a cabal of nonwhite immigrants are trying to replace white people and European culture by increasing the minority population) to the 18-year-old Buffalo shooting suspect. The suspect, accused of killing 10 people and wounded three at a Buffalo supermarket, most of them Black, livestreamed the massacre on the online platform Twitch (the platform removed the content) and posted a racist screed justifying his shooting online.
The volatile lie of the conspiracy theory isn’t going away anytime soon. In fact, it’s on the rise.
At the same time, Elon Musk, who is proposing to buy Twitter, is championing unfettered free speech on the platform. His cause may excite those who think Twitter users should be able to tweet whatever they want without the threat of suspension or removal from the platform, but Musk’s view of free speech collides with the reality of radicalization.
Musk has repeatedly said he’ll allow on Twitter anything that’s legal, seemingly defining free speech as anything short of a crime: “By free speech I mean that which matches the law.” Republican leaders were quick to praise Musk’s potential Twitter takeover as a “return” to free speech. Several GOP members of Congress wrote him a gushing letter in anticipation of his ascension to the Twitter throne. Their enthusiasm may have grown when Musk said he’d likely restore former President Donald Trump’s account, which Twitter banned after Trump’s incendiary remarks after the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
It almost doesn’t matter whether Musk knowingly intends to turn Twitter into an even more harmful platform for rapid radicalization or, as some believe, he is perilously naïve to the threat and oblivious to the gray area between benign speech and clear violations of law such as direct threats of violence or threats to life. Musk’s definition of free speech doesn’t come with any responsibility; that makes him the wrong person to lead a social media platform.
Not only did social media play a role in the planning and execution of the shooter’s killing of 10 innocent people but it continues to play a role in making that livestream available on other platforms after Twitch removed it. According to The New York Times, within 24 hours of the shooting, the video, or clips of it, was posted on a site called Streamable and viewed over three million times before it was removed. Twitter and Facebook carried a link to the video that was shared hundreds of times immediately after the shooting. It’s still out there.








