A mass exodus from Twitter is looming. Lawyers are solemnly and self-congratulatoryly announcing they’re quitting the platform. Law firms are quietly deactivating their accounts. Follower counts are plummeting, and logging on to Twitter feels like being a “Take Me Out” contestant declaring your stamp collection and watching the lights come on one after the other.
Does any of this matter? Not in the grand scheme of things, but every single one of us who uses Twitter (let’s not call it X) is probably having our own internal conversations about whether we should quit Twitter, where on earth we should go, and, worst case scenario, whether we should just get off social media altogether.
I’ve always felt it was a bit unclear what the appeal is for companies. Either they post very bland and mediocre content to keep compliance officers happy, or they risk ruining their brand with random comments. Either way, there doesn’t seem to be much benefit. If you take one random top 20 company with around 17,000 followers, you’ll find that their Twitter posts are sporadic. A post right after the election got 591 views and one like. The only interaction was from a disgruntled anonymous account that generated 27 replies, none of which were complimentary.
For individual lawyers, the benefits of Twitter are more tangible (though the risks of an errant tweet are just as serious). It’s often said that Twitter is a cesspit, but it’s still relatively easy to avoid its stench. You should obviously avoid the “For You” section, and for the sake of your sanity, never open replies to posts about equality, diversity, etc. If you avoid expressing political opinions, the algorithms will likely avoid throwing them at you.
Legal Twitter is largely a supportive, reassuring, and informative place. If you write that you’re struggling, or fed up, or looking for a reference for a case from 1971, you can usually find someone to help. Over the years, it has felt like a genuine community and has been a positive place, despite the criticism that can be hurled on social media.
And Twitter has proven to be a key marketing tool for many legal professionals: legal writers, podcasters and presenters can gain an edge with their online presence and benefit from being well-educated.
Furthermore, some argue that by removing lawyers who play a key role in educating the public about the law, the site is inviting those who seek to manipulate and undermine the law. It is more important than ever to speak out in defense of the rule of law and those who enforce it.
So why leave?
Those who left said they could no longer tolerate being subservient to owner Elon Musk, who they say stokes the flames of division in the country from thousands of miles away, spreading hateful and inflammatory content unchecked on his site. But few billionaires have risen to their positions by holding themselves to the highest ethical standards. Why should Musk be different?
Ultimately, it’s a personal choice. BlueSky seems to be the leading choice for relocating lawyers. I opened an account this week too, but just the thought of starting over is more exhausting than exhilarating. I’m not sure I’d bother, to be honest. Maybe I’ll just go for a walk instead.
Maybe, after all, we’ll all spend a little less time staring at screens in the future, and by pushing people away, Musk may be doing society an unwitting favor.