Tapestries-55 | Culture
Twitter (again), oil, the World Cup, and antisemitism (again).
1. What I’m thinking
Sometimes I ask myself whether writing about Twitter is like writing about World of Warcraft or Zelda; an immersive and consequential experience to some, and a fantasy world of self-referential memes and stories to others. But I write about it because everything is downstream from culture, and in the western world, the Twitter timeline is amongst the most important forums shaping the present cultural moment. So for a second edition in a row, I find myself writing about Twitter, because what’s been happening on the platform in the last few weeks matters. The discourse and tone illuminate and influence the culture we share, whether you’re on the platform or not.
The two biggest stories on the platform at the moment (and it’s not even close), are (a) the fallout from the FTX bankruptcy and the fraud it appears Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) committed, and (b) Elon Musk’s moves to right-size Twitter’s business by firing a huge chunk of the workforce and fundamentally reorienting company culture. I am absolutely and shamelessly glued to these stories, but if I’m being honest, in and of themselves they don’t register in the top 10 of the most globally consequential events in the world right now. FTX/SBF and Musk are compelling and dramatic narratives, but my personal interest is largely driven by what they — and the responses to them — say about our culture. So here, I’m going to try make useful and broader observations on each.
1. The coverage of FTX and SBF by the papers of record in the US is nothing short of embarrassing. The New York Times spoke to SBF this week and published what can only be summed up as a puff piece suggesting the man who allegedly committed an enormous fraud was simply ambitious and over-extended; Trung Phan sums it up well here. The Washington Post followed up with a similarly bizarre piece that anchored the story to SBF’s work contributing to pandemic preparedness; Autism Capital (yes that’s a real handle) sums it up well here. Finally, Forbes ran a piece noting how a key FTX figure (Caroline Ellison) has now become a darling of the alt-right, notwithstanding the whole SBF saga is built on a sandcastle of effective altruism; Mike Solana sums it up well here. It’s just a breathtaking approach to reporting on what appears to be the century’s biggest fraud.
What’s interesting, is that in complex situations that should really require nuance — like in relation to free speech, race, gender, climate and Covid responses — our leading newspapers regularly see the world in black and white, proclaiming with self-righteous certainty how the world is and how we should see it. But when it comes to a clear-cut case of alleged criminal behaviour and wrongdoing, it’s a matter of yes but he’s actually not a bad guy and donated to the right causes. Spare me. The reporting on this episode is somehow more cartoonishly bad than one would expect, and the narrative being spun here stinks. The lesson: The New York Times and its ilk regularly dish up trash like this. Proceed accordingly.
2. Elon Musk is coming for the technology and managerial classes’ golden goose; they’re not happy about it, and if he succeeds, look out. Watching Musk at Twitter has been fascinating for many reasons (see last Tapestry). And now, what’s incredibly interesting, is to see what happens if he is able to successfully run the platform with ~90% fewer employees.
The smartest path one could have taken in the last 10 years was to go work at Google, make your way to lower-to-middle management, and clip up to $1mm a year (and often much more) in total compensation for little risk and not much hard work. Tech employees (especially at large cap tech companies in the US) are phenomenally-well compensated, and they’ve arguably been the biggest beneficiaries (with the least risk) of the last decade of low interest rates and technology/cloud adoption. That means they’ve also got the most to lose.
We are now in a broader tech lay-off cycle as the economy slows. If Musk somehow pulls off running the company with 700 instead of 7,000 staff, it'd be a scary time to be an employee in large-cap tech. And I think that explains the downright hysteria you're seeing on the platform and in the media. Antonio — someone who knows how these organizations work better than almost anyone — summed it up well:
Musk is coming for tech's golden goose: the managerial class’ belief that their influence and rich compensation is a right, not a privilege. He may indeed crash the platform in the process, and if he does so, he’s the individual with the most to lose. But a part of me has always wanted him to succeed, and that part grew even bigger this week as I watched some leaders in tech and journalism wail and hysterically tremble at the prospect of Musk’s success. The lesson: If Musk successfully runs Twitter with his revised, lean workforce, tech may be about to go through a fundamental reset.
2. What I’m consuming
A. Biden Caves To Saudis Rather Than Pump More Oil, by Michael Shellenberger on Substack
Joe Biden was scathing of Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in his presidential campaign in 2020. After the US concluded that MBS probably personally ordered the murder and dismembering of Jamal Kashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Biden said “[w]e are going to make them pay the price and make them the pariah that they are.” Fast forward two years, and Joe’s tune has changed considerably. This week, the Biden administration granted MBS immunity from a lawsuit for the murder of Khashoggi. Why you may ask? Oil. Because the geopolitics of the next decade will be driven by energy and oil. And because Biden and the US are now reliant on MBS and Saudi Arabia providing them and the global market with oil that the US needs, but can’t be seen to be pumping:
It’s clear that the Biden administration intervened in order to appease the Saudis and get them to produce more oil so that the U.S. doesn’t. Shortly before the mid-term elections, Biden made clear that he is deliberately shutting down domestic oil production wherever he can. “No more drilling,” he shouted at a New York campaign rally. “There is no more drilling! I haven't formed any new drilling.” As such, Biden has put the sectarian demands of US environmental activists ahead of human rights and national security.
I don’t want a world utterly reliant on oil. But it’s the world we have right now. Unless we prioritize pragmatism and practicality as primary principles in our belated move away from fossil fuels, we will repeatedly find ourselves in situations where we must make morally-compromised decisions with murderers and dictators who own the resources we depend on now (oil), and will depend on in the future (metals, rare earths, and other components of the green transition). And on the topic of fossil fuels and murky morals…
B. How to Get on TV, by David Goldblatt in London Review of Books
The World Cup kicks off in Qatar this week. The hosting of the tournament in Qatar has been critiqued for years, with critics focused on five issues: “the original bid to host the World Cup; the availability of alcohol; the question of human rights, especially women’s and LGBT+ rights; the treatment of migrant workers; and the environmental implications of the tournament.”
Per the section above about Biden and MBS, our world is dependent on fossil fuels. In Qatar’s case, its liquid natural gas reserves have made the country spectacularly rich. Qatar has carefully channeled this wealth into (amongst other things) global sports, as a means for generating influence and crafting legitimacy. As the World Cup begins this week, I found this piece by David Goldblatt to be a very thoughtful, informative and insightful look at the history, geography and moral complexities embedded in the world’s greatest sporting spectacle, and the country hosting it.
C. Chapelle was Right, by Yair Rosenberg in The Atlantic
Writing about antisemitism sucks but I just don’t see how I can not write about it right now. Unfortunately, the Kanye and Kyrie sagas have (predictably) normalized antisemitism in the public arena. Dave Chappelle hosted Saturday Night Live last week, and his opening monologue was somewhere between flirting with borderline acceptable Jewish jokes, and some pretty blatant antisemitism. For those of you that have subscribed for a while (or know me), I’m not an antisemitism alarmist. But I am alarmed by how the line of what’s considered publicly acceptable things to say about Jews continues to shift outwards. Yair articulated the nuance involved in understanding the normalization of antisemitism in its broader cultural context:
There’s an argument to be made that what Chapelle is putting out there isn’t antisemitic. I disagree but there’s a valid argument to be made. But it’s also not the point. Yair’s assertion here in reference to Chappelle is important: something is a joke as long as the crowd implicitly agrees on the reality and context that makes a joke a joke. My concern as a Jew isn’t about comedians making Jewish jokes; my concern is directed at the crowd, and the eerie and scary feeling that we’re living through a shift in the crowd’s attitude regarding what it considers an acceptable way to think and talk about Jews.
3. What I’m writing
This edition is getting long, so I’ll save a book update for the next one. Have an amazing weekend y’all.