SIMINGTON COMMENTS ON ACQUISITION OF TWITTER 
 
   WASHINGTON, D.C., May 2, 2022—Some have recently called on the FCC to stop 
Elon Musk from acquiring Twitter. But nothing in the United States Code or our regulations 
gives us the right to interfere with this transaction. Our competition review authority does not 
and has never extended to internet platforms like Twitter. 
    
   But even if this deal were within our purview, it would be inappropriate and contrary to the 
public interest to block it. Mr. Musk’s acquisition does not raise any concerns about vertical or 
horizontal concentration in the social media market, and there is no reason to think it would 
otherwise limit competition or harm consumer welfare.  
    
   In fact, antitrust regulators should welcome this purchase. In recent years, consumer choice 
and freedom have suffered due to the restrictive, and often politically motivated, content 
moderation practices adopted across all major social media platforms. If Mr. Musk follows 
through on his stated intention to ease Twitter’s restrictions on speech, he would almost 
certainly enhance competition and better serve those Americans, the majority, who value free 
speech.  
    
   Also unpersuasive are selective concerns about concentration of ownership.  Nothing about 
Mr. Musk becoming the sole owner of Twitter would be out of step with the ownership 
structures of other social media platforms or, for that matter, media companies generally. 
Google, YouTube, Facebook, the Washington Post, and the New York Times are each owned 
or controlled by one or two people or a single family.  Vertical integration is also widespread, 
and there are numerous examples of common ownership and control of broadband internet 
access service and online services like search engines, streaming platforms, and news websites. 
Concerns about Mr. Musk controlling both Twitter and Starlink—a broadband provider 
currently serving less than one percent of Americans—cannot be taken seriously.  
    
   The FCC cannot, and should not, block this sale. We should instead applaud Mr. Musk for 
doing something about a serious problem that government has so far failed to address. I 
encourage my colleagues across the government to investigate the market failures and perverse 
incentives that caused big tech companies to standardize around censorious and slanted content 
policies in the first place. If this acquisition leads to corporate success by bucking the trend 
toward curated and managed speech informed by the sensibilities of a narrow and 
unrepresentative class of insiders, it will bring greater diversity to the social media experience. 
And, as this experiment is clearly lawful, I for one look forward to seeing what comes of it. 
    
   Finally, I am particularly troubled by arguments that the federal government must act with 
the purpose of stopping Mr. Musk from enshrining free expression on Twitter.  The only merit 
in such proposals is their candor in proposing something so blatantly illegal. The law in this 
country does not recognize a government interest in restricting the open exchange of ideas. 
Labeling content as “fake news” or “disinformation” does not change that. It would be not only 
unconstitutional, but plainly un-American, for any arm of the government to act against Twitter 
or Mr. Musk for such a purpose. 
    
    
    Office of Commissioner Nathan Simington   Media Contact:  Michael Sweeney 
 www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/nathan-simington (202) 418-1087 or Michael.sweeney@fcc.gov 
 
 
                                     ###