New essay! A deep dive with three parts:

Part 1 argues that the main reason social media benefits populism is that it destroys elite gatekeeping, providing a mass media platform for popular ideas historically stigmatised by establishment elites.

Part 2 then outlines several reasons why we should nevertheless resist moves for more elite gatekeeping on social media. Not only are such efforts likely to make things worse, but the decline of elite gatekeeping has had many beneficial consequences, and the negative consequences, although real, are often overstated.

Finally, Part 3 argues that many of these negative consequences are not inevitable either. A large part of the blame for them lies in the fact that establishment institutions have failed to adapt to the new pressures and responsibilities of the social media age. Instead, they have clung to a set of habits and norms—most fundamentally, an aversion to engaging with illiberal ideas to avoid “platforming” and “normalising” them—adapted to a world that no longer exists.

Put simply: Once established institutions lost the privilege to control the public conversation, they acquired an obligation to participate within it, which, so far, they have mostly failed to do.