The University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab has reported finding evidence that Pegasus spyware was being used to listen-in on UK government networks for 10 Downing Street and the Foreign and Commonwealth Offices (FCO) in 2020 and 2021.

Pegasus 

Pegasus spyware is sold by Israeli-based NSO Group to governments to carry out surveillance by infecting phones with malicious surveillance software. Pegasus is essentially a complete surveillance toolkit that’s generally sold to nation states at prices that could be millions of US dollars. The software can extract the contents of a phone, give the operator access to any texts, photographs, the camera, and the microphone. This gives the Pegasus operator the ability to conduct real-time surveillance, e.g. of private meetings. Pegasus is used for several surveillance purposes, e.g. by law enforcement tracking criminals, or for authoritarians / governments listening-in on people of interest such as journalists and activists as a way of quashing dissent. For example, Spain has recently been reported as being implicated in the use of Pegasus (and Candiru) to spy on 65 individuals related to Catalonia’s government.

Who Was Listening? 

The Citizen Lab has reported that the suspected infections related to the FCO were associated with Pegasus operators linked to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), India, Cyprus, and Jordan. Also, the suspected infection at the UK Prime Minister’s Office has been linked to the UAE.

How Did They Get Infected With Spyware? 

According to The Citizen Lab, it is because the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its successor office, the Foreign Commonwealth and Development office (FCDO), have personnel in many countries. The suspected FCO infections may, therefore, have related to FCO devices located abroad and using foreign SIM cards. This is a similar situation to the hacking of foreign phone numbers used by US State Department employees in Uganda in 2021. Citizen Lab has also concluded that Pegasus was used to infect a device connected to 10 Downing Street’s network and the office of Prime Minister Boris Johnson on July 26 and 27, 2020. It was the servers to which the data was transmitted which led The Citizen Lab suspects to suspect that the UAE was most likely behind the hack.

In addition to the Downing Street infection, Citizen Lab reports that phones connected to the Foreign Office were hacked using Pegasus on at least five occasions, from July, 2020, through June, 2021.

NSO Says.. 

NSO Group, the makers of the surveillance software are reported to have said that the recent allegations about the use of its software are false and that organisations like The Citizens Lab are politically motivated, and their reports may be inaccurate.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Pegasus is known to be widely used by governments and agencies around the world and has legitimate uses e.g., tracking criminals. However, its ability to provide real-time surveillance and the difficulty in detecting it are likely reasons why it appears to have been used for many less savoury purposes and surveillance linked to repression. It is, of course, worrying that it could be so easy for (allegedly) other states to listen-in on Downing Street and the UK Prime Minister, the implications of which we don’t yet fully know.  Research fromfrom Amnesty International and Citizen Lab suggest that ways individuals can avoid infection by Pegasus includes rebooting the device daily (to clean it), disabling iMessage and Facetime (exploitation vectors), keeping the device up to date with the latest patches, and never clicking on unsolicited links in SMS or email messages.

In this tech insight, we look at what ‘toxic’ backlinks are, how to identify them, and how to remove them.

Backlinks

Backlinks (incoming links) are believed to be one of Google’s top three ranking factors. Trustworthy backlinks from websites with a high authority score are a factor which contribute to higher search engine rankings. However, some lower quality links, perhaps from suspect websites, referred to as unnatural links / spammy links / “toxic links” can have an opposite negative effect on search engine rankings.

What Makes A Link “Toxic”? 

According to Google’s guidelines, “Any links intended to manipulate PageRank or a site’s ranking in Google search results may be considered part of a link scheme and a violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines. This includes any behaviour that manipulates links to your site or outgoing links from your site.” For example, this could include buying or selling links that pass PageRank, excessive link exchanges, large-scale article marketing or guest posting campaigns with keyword-rich anchor text links and using automated programs or services to create links to a website. Also, Google identifies links that weren’t editorially placed or vouched for by the site’s owner on a page as being “unnatural links”. Examples are text advertisements, paid-for advertorials or native advertising that all pass PageRank (PageRank is a value of importance allocated to a page by Google’s algorithms).

In summary, a toxic link is a non-editorially placed link that comes from websites that have been set up for the purpose of linking out, and which aren’t topically relevant, and aren’t indexed by Google. Also, toxic links can be links:

– Forced in blog comments or on a private blog network (PBN).

– From ‘spun’ content. This involves writing one article, using software to spin it into many different variations, and posting it on different directories while including backlinks from the text.

– Hidden in footers.

In low-quality directories.

– Included on every page of a website

– Using exact match keywords or followed links marked as sponsored.

– From large reciprocal linking schemes (lacking relevance).

– From a widget or plugin (putting the link there as the developer).

– From scaled guest posting (platforms solely for exchanging guest posts).

Opposite of Toxic = Quality Links 

The kinds of links that are unlikely to be marked as toxic and really could deliver a boost to search engine rankings are what could be considered ‘quality’ links. These are essentially links that have been editorially placed as a result of someone finding the content on a valuable page and choosing to link to it. It also helps if that link comes from a trusted, relevant web page with a good PageRank that has the potential to send referral traffic, and uses a relevant keyword / key phrase in the anchor link.

How Toxic Links Are Discovered 

The main ways that toxic links from web pages to websites are discovered include being identified by search engine algorithms, a competitor submitting a spam report to the search engine, or simply being in a niche that’s known for spam. Competitors may also discover a website’s toxic links by using specialist SEO software, e.g. SEMRush.

Consequences Of Having / Building Toxic Links

If a website has unnatural / spammy / toxic backlinks, the consequences could be:

– A drop in search engine rankings.

– A manual action by the search engines being triggered, e.g. a review. This could mean a ranking penalty being applied to certain pages (or site-wide) until the toxic links are removed from the pages they came from.

– The links being ignored by the search engines, bringing no benefit to the website.

How To Discover Whether Your Website Has Toxic Links 

In order to discover what backlinks you have (and which may be toxic), conduct a website (root domain) link audit of the website. This can be carried out manually, or using specialist SEO audit programs, e.g. SemRush, Majestic, SpyFu, Screaming Frog, and many more. Link audits can also be paid-for and outsourced to digital marketing companies or agencies. Also, Google’s Search Console (formerly Google Webmaster Tools) can be used.

Once the toxic links have been identified:

– Build a remove list (and a whitelist).

– Contact the site owners for your ‘remove list’ and manually ask them to remove links to your site, keeping a record of which ones and what the response was. Software tools include templates for removal requests.

– For all those that don’t reply, create a ‘disavow list’ (text) for the links that need to be removed. Login to Google Search Console, submit the file via Google’s link disavow tool, and wait.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The quality of a website’s backlinks has been for many years, and still is an important factor for helping to decide both PageRank and search engine rankings. Google for example, has clear guidelines about what makes a quality link, and what will be regarded as an unnatural (toxic) link. There are now many ways e.g., using specialist SEO software to discover which links could be holding a website back from achieving the kind of better rankings which could translate into more sales and enquiries. Also, insights into backlinks to competitor websites can help to deliver competitive advantage. This is why many companies and organisations now regularly monitor their toxic backlinks either in-house or outsourced to a third-party as well as trying to keep expanding their quality backlinks.

In this article, we look at the possible causes of the recent large losses of Netflix subscribers, and what’s next for the global streaming giant.

200,000 Subscribers Lost 

In its Q1 results, the world’s biggest global streaming service, Netflix, revealed that it had lost a massive 200,000 subscribers in the first 3 months of the year. It’s a far cry from the early days of lockdown when families who had to stay at home signed up to Netflix and the company reported a massive gain of 8.5 million new users in the fourth quarter of 2020 (36 million subscribers in total in 2020). By April 2021, however, Netflix was blaming a big slowdown (2 million less subscribers than forecast) on the slowdown in production of new content during the pandemic. However, with new subscriber numbers going from bad to worse, share prices falling by 35 per cent, competitors like HBO and HBO Max picking up the lost subscribers, and Netflix cancelling many new shows and movies to mitigate the losses, what’s been going wrong and why, and what could be next for Netflix?

Challenges 

Some of the main difficulties that have led to the huge loss of subscribers from Netflix include:

– Like many other companies, pulling out of Russia due to their waging war against Ukraine. This has reportedly lost Netflix 700,000 viewers. However, Netflix is reported to have gained 500,000 new subscribers since the start of 2022 which offsets the loss to an extent.

– A large number of Netflix viewers are not necessarily paying subscribers. This is because accounts (i.e. account passwords) are often shared between family members – an estimated 100 million households watch the service for free using shared passwords. This has led to Netflix testing (in Chile, Costa Rica, and Peru) monthly payment plans to add user profiles for people outside their household. If successful, this could be rolled out to other countries, but some commentators believe this could cause another drop-off in subscribers and make it difficult to attract new ones.

– The cost of living crisis (food, fuel, and energy) is forcing people to cut back on subscriptions and what some may see as non-essential products and services, such as streaming service subscriptions.

– A price increase in the US in January, a price increase for UK Standard and Premium subscriptions in January, and another price increase scheduled for May have caused some customers to cancel and / or switch to another service.

– A slowing rollout of broadband and now the threat of plans that would allow broadband giants to charge tech companies for access to their networks.

– A lack of new programs and films being made during the pandemic affecting the content that Netflix (and other services) could offer.

– Increased competition, e.g. from Disney Plus, Prime Video, HBO and HBO Max, and Apple TV.

– The effects of the widescale news coverage that Netflix is losing subscribers and of Netflix’s warning to shareholders that another 2 million subscribers look likely to leave in the 3 months to July.

What Now? 

In response to the subscriber drop-off crisis, in addition to planning to possibly introduce extra payment plans to get revenue from family and friends sharing passwords, other measures Netflix is taking include:

– Cancelling the development of many new shows and movies, particularly in its animation department. This is despite Netflix also saying that it plans to improve the quality of its programming.

– Considering the introduction of a cheaper, ad-supported subscription for consumers.

– The price increase next month.

– The possible introduction of a free games service for subscribers.

Five Forces Help To Reveal The Dilemma 

Looking at Netflix’s challenges quickly and briefly through Harvard Business School’s famous business strategist Michael E Porter’s ‘Five Forces’ model helps to highlight the position of Netflix:

Threat of New Entrants:

Netflix is now facing some serious competition, although as the leading platform, Netflix is in a good position to negotiate with content creators in a way that new entrants can’t.

Threat of Substitutes:

With the world now mostly opened-up from the pandemic and the increasing penetration of technology into everything, the threat of substitutes is significant, e.g. gaming, Spotify, AR and VR, and more.

Bargaining Power of Customers:

With a subscription model, a price sensitive (cost of living squeeze) customer base, and plenty of competition, plus the ease of switching, customers (as subscription drop-offs have shown) currently have considerable bargaining power.

Bargaining Power of Suppliers:

Although Netflix is still highly dependent on licensed content, as the biggest service with multiple agreements in place for how its service is delivered and its power overs content creators, supplier power is not generally a huge threat to Netflix.

Competitive Rivalry:

Clearly, with many other alternative services now in what is still a booming market (Disney Plus, Prime Video, HBO and HBO Max, and Apple TV), levels of competitive rivalry are now a serious threat to Netflix.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Although the news for the last quarter was bad, and more subscriber loss is predicted, it shouldn’t be forgotten that Netflix is still a global leader in its market with 222 million subscribers and with a good portion of households as subscribers in its main markets, the US and Canada (75 million out of a total 142 million). Netflix may find it difficult to suddenly start charging for all users when it has essentially allowed password sharing for so long; this and the content are likely to have been motivators to choose and continue with Netflix. Price increases to cash-strapped pandemic restriction-free customers may also be high risk, as may cancelling new content (Netflix believes that customers value its content quality). The losses of Netflix, however, are now the gains of the increasingly strong competition (HBO picking up 3 million subscribers), and a changed post-pandemic environment where there are now many different tech entertainment alternatives makes for a challenging environment going forward. Things look, as forecast, like getting a bit worse for Netflix before they get better.

The UK Government’s Department for Transport (DfT) has announced that following changes to The Highway Code, users of automated vehicles will be allowed to watch TV on built-in screens.

Viewing Content On Built-In Screens 

Following a public consultation launched a year ago on how self-driving vehicles can be used safely on UK roads, the DfT has announced changes to The Highway Code. One change to the current regulation will be to allow drivers of automated vehicles to “view content that is not related to driving on built-in display screens”, while the self-driving vehicle is in control. Even though watching TV will be allowed, it will still be illegal to use mobile phones in self-driving mode. This is because research has shown that this can pose a greater risk in distracting drivers.

Must Still Be Ready To Resume Control When Needed 

Even though motorists may be allowed to watch TV while in self-driving mode, the DfT says that the current technology is ‘assistive’ rather than completely autonomous and, as such, drivers must always retain control and be ready to act in a timely way if they are prompted to – such as when they approach motorway exits.

Not Allowed Yet 

Self-driving cars are not currently allowed on UK roads and the changes to The Highway Code are intended to help ensure the first wave of technology will be used safely. The DfT has said that the first vehicles capable of driving themselves could be ready for use later this year. The first wave of hands-free vehicles to be legally allowed (and legally defined as “self-driving”) will be vehicles with automated lane-keeping systems (ALKS). This technology controls the position and speed of a car in a single lane, and it will be limited to 37mph (60km/h). Tesla cars, for example, already have a mode called “Autopilot” which uses lane technology similar to ALKS and is “level two” on the five defined levels of self-driving cars (level three would not need the driver’s attention at all times).

Benefits 

The benefits of having self- driving vehicles on UK roads could include:

– Improved road safety. Self-driving vehicles can regulate and eliminate common human errors, i.e. being able to stop in time if there’s an obstruction ahead. This could reduce the human error which is a contributory factor in 88 per cent of all recorded road collisions.

– Environmental/green benefits and reduced fuel costs. Keeping a consistent distance could mean fewer traffic jams and less idling. The smooth driving autonomous vehicles could also mean lower fuel consumption thereby saving fuel and reducing greenhouse gases.

– Greater accessibility. Those who can’t currently drive or have physical challenges could use AVs, e.g the elderly and those with disabilities.

– The creation of more jobs and opportunities in the AV industry. The DfT estimates that the development of self-driving vehicles could create 38,000 new jobs and be worth £41.7 billion to the UK economy by 2035.

Concerns 

Some of the concerns about the recent announcement and changes to The Highway Code are that:

– Vehicles with ALKS technology are not truly automated but are simply assisted driving systems that rely on the driver to take back control. This could lead to drivers putting too much trust in the driving system which could result in accidents.

– The DfT’s recent changes to The Highway Code are fuelling unrealistic optimism about when fully autonomous vehicles will actually be safe enough to introduce to UK roads.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The consultation and the changes to The Highway Code may be intended to ensure the first wave of technology will be used safely, but that first wave may be some way off yet. Much more regulatory and technical progress needs to be made before fully self-driving / autonomous vehicles make it onto UK roads. There are concerns too that ALKS technology as self-driving could cause confusion that could lead to accidents. Drivers need to be sure that they are responsible within vehicles containing ALKS technology and they need to be in full control. That said, a future with autonomous vehicles on the roads could bring jobs, opportunities and reduce costs and environmental impact (particularly if they were electric ones) while overcoming other difficulties for haulage and logistics companies. Additionally, they could provide safer, cheaper, and more accessible transport for all.

Researchers from Canadian cybersecurity company eSentire have reported that attackers are targeting corporate hiring managers with phishing emails containing the ‘more_eggs’ malware, using fake CVs as a decoy to launch the malware and sidestep detection. The more_eggs malware is a backdoor suite that can steal valuable information and move across the compromised network. Reported targets so far have been a US-based aerospace company, a UK-based accounting business, and a Canada-based law firm and a staffing agency.

Windows 11 ‘voice typing’ feature uses online speech recognition so that you can enter text on your PC simply by speaking. Here’s how to use it:

– Firstly, make sure you’re connected to the Internet, have a working microphone, and have your cursor in a text box.

– Press Windows logo key + H on a hardware keyboard.

– Press the microphone key next to the Spacebar on the touch keyboard.

– Voice typing will start listening automatically. Wait for the “Listening…” alert before you start speaking.

To stop voice typing:

– Say a voice typing command, e.g. “Stop listening”.

– Press the microphone button on the voice typing menu.

With plastic disintegrating into microplastic particles, polluting the seas and harming wildlife, scientists are asking: could microalgae be the answer tackling the microplastic problem?

Microplastics 

Ranging from 1 nanometre (nm) to less than 5 micrometres (mm), non-biodegradable microplastic particles are either primary or secondary fragments of plastic pollution that find their way into the sea and other waterways. Primary microplastic particles come from sources such as personal care products, unintended spills, abrasion of synthetic clothes during laundering and suchlike. Secondary microplastic particles come from the breakdown of larger plastics by weathering, wave action, wind abrasion, and UV radiation from the sun.

A 2015 study published in Science Magazine said that by 2025, 00–250 million metric tons of plastic waste could be ending up in the oceans every year, and researchers estimated that by 2050, the amount of plastic waste in landfills and the environment could total 12 billion metric tons!

Damage and Harm To Sea Life 

The huge problem with microplastics is that they have now spread throughout the food chain of the oceans as they are ingested by animals or accidentally or mistaken for food, causing chronic toxicity, sickness, neurological and reproductive toxicity, and death. Microplastic particles have also been detected in our drinking water, beer and food products.

Microalgae … A Possible Remediation Solution? 

With measures such as the United Nations Environmental Programme conducting education and awareness campaigns in 100+ countries, laws being passed about microbeads, and campaigns around the world, the problem is now being better understood. As well as drastically reducing plastic waste production, the remediation of microplastics already in the environment is a major part of the clear-up.

Using microalgae is now thought to be an ecological, scalable way to help biodegrade microplastic particles in the water. Microalgae, also known as phytoplankton, are microscopic organisms found in both seawater and freshwater that use photosynthesis to capture carbon from CO2 and release oxygen as a by-product.

How Can Microalgae Break Down Microplastics? 

Microalgae can attach themselves to the surface of plastic microparticles, produce enzymes which can weaken the bonds of plastic polymers, and convert them into carbon dioxide, water and new biomass. So far, studies indicate that microalgae can be particularly effective at biodegrading polyethylene (used in clothing fibres and plastic bottles), low-density polyethylene or LDPE (used in plastic bags) and bisphenol A or BPA (both chemicals to harden plastic). One 2020 study showed that a consortium of blue-green microalgae used for biodegradation of low-density polyethylene resulted in a 58.9 per cent decrease of carbon composition in the LDPE sample.

The Benefits of Using Microalgae 

Some of the benefits of using microalgae to biodegrade microplastics are:

– Microalgae are a natural solution that can be grown quickly, at low cost, and at scale.

– They can be grown in areas that aren’t fertile, aren’t inhabited, or in man-made ponds or natural lakes, e.g. in ponds on the coast, such as those in Morocco. The large areas of natural freshwater lakes in countries such as Indonesia have also been identified as having great potential for microalgae production.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation? 

Microalgae appear to be an important likely contributor to effectively tackling the huge environmental and ecological threat posed by microplastics. The fact that they are a natural solution that can be grown at scale, at low cost, are sustainable, and be easily deployed makes them a very promising option not just for degrading microplastics, but also for helping to tackle the problem of global warming. Also, the growing of microalgae at scale could provide jobs and other opportunities as part of a new eco industry. Even though microalgae offer real hope, more research and investment is needed, and microalgae usage should be recognised as part of a wider plan which includes continued education about and improvements in plastic recycling and reusing strategies, regulation and legislation, and more research for additional solutions.

Researchers from the Stanford Internet Observatory have reported finding more than one thousand ‘virtual’ employees on the LinkedIn platform.

Faces Created By Artificial Intelligence 

Virtual employees in this case are AI-generated photos of employees, the photos of whom don’t belong to any person (living or dead) and are made from mixtures of faces mashed together and featured in 1000+ fake LinkedIn profiles. In this research, it has been alleged that the ‘virtual employees’ have been set up by sales firms to generate more business for themselves. The researchers have suggested that some 70 businesses, listed as the employers of the ‘virtual employees’, may have been using the profiles to send out mass messages without needing to hire more staff or to breach LinkedIn’s messaging protocols. However, despite going against LinkedIn’s policy that every LinkedIn profile must represent a real person, there’s no hard facts that the virtual employee fake profiles have broken any laws.

Problems With Fake Accounts – AI Fakes 

On other platforms in recent times, computer-generated faces in fake accounts have been linked to state campaigns, e.g. to distribute pro-Chinese propaganda to discredit opponents of China’s government, in trolling and the harassing of activists, to exert political influence (e.g. posing as Americans supporting Trump, and spreading pro-Kremlin propaganda on Facebook and Instagram to undermine trust in the Ukrainian government).

Easy or Difficult To Spot? 

In this case, researchers reported discrepancies in the photos that aroused suspicion, e.g. a woman wearing a single earring and strange hair, unusual eye placement, and blurry backgrounds.

However, a recent study (Feb 2022, Sophie Nightingale, Hany Farid) found that AI-synthesised faces can be indistinguishable and more trustworthy than real faces. The study demonstrated that people only have a 50 per cent chance of correctly guessing whether a face has been created by a computer.

Deepfake Threat 

Fake, computer-generated photos are just a part of the wider threat posed by ‘deepfakes’. Deepfake videos, for example, which are banned from Facebook, use deep learning technology and manipulated images of target individuals (found online), often celebrities, politicians, and other well-known people to create very convincing videos of the subjects saying and doing whatever the video-maker wants them to.

Examples of how these have been used recently are the deepfake videos posted online of both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The fake video of President Zelensky talking about surrender had been posted on Meta (Facebook), Instagram, Meta, and its Russian counterpart VKontakte. Meta quickly removed the video from its platform for breaking its rules relating to “manipulated media”. The deepfake video of Putin, posted on Twitter, showed the Russian president announcing the surrender of Russia and asking Russian troops to drop their weapons and go home. A close examination of the video revealed that it had been made using clips from an address delivered by Putin on Feb 21.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Although not illegal, these recently discovered deepfake photos would appear to have been designed to perhaps unfairly gain a competitive advantage and to influence the perceptions of other businesspeople. Businesses should be vigilant, therefore, when contacted by (and when interacting with) other profiles online. Although social media platforms already check for and remove many fake profiles (LinkedIn removed more than 15 million fake accounts in the first six months of 2021), more effort and investment needs to be made to stop many of them from slipping through the net and they also need to develop faster and improved detection and take-down systems. Also, as deepfakes improve in quality and become more difficult to distinguish from the real thing, plus become targeted and weaponised, social media platforms are likely to need their own sophisticated AI systems to stay ahead of fakers, some of whom may be state backed with plenty of resources at their disposal.

In this article, we look at the next phase of Elon Musk’s attempt to control Twitter – a so-called ‘hostile’ takeover.

The Next Stage In The Twitter / Musk Story – Hostile Takeover 

Billionaire Elon Musk recently became Twitter’s largest shareholder after recently acquiring a 9.2 per cent stake in the social media company. Twitter then invited Musk to join its Board. Musk, however, announced that he would not be joining Twitter’s Board. Instead, last week Musk went down the hostile takeover route by offering to make Twitter Inc. private in an unsolicited deal valued at $43 billion. Musk offered to $54.20 per share in cash, which is 38 per cent above the price on April 1, (the last trading day before Musk went public) in the hope of winning-over shareholders.

What Is A Hostile Takeover? 

A hostile takeover happens when one company acquires another without approval for a merger or takeover from the target company’s management, and despite any objections from the Board. Hostile takeovers usually occur after the formal offer has been rejected and tend to apply to larger public companies. The acquirer seeks to achieve at least 51 per cent ownership in the target company’s stock to gain control. Hostile takeovers are legal and may happen for reasons such as:

– The two companies may have failed to reach a merger agreement.

– Some investors may think the management of the company is mismanaging it or is not maximising shareholder value.

– The acquirer wants the target company’s assets or technology and distribution to strengthen its own business.

– Shareholders often benefit initially in hostile takeovers, e.g. in a tender offer, it may mean that the acquirer offers to purchase stock shares from the target’s shareholders at a higher price than the market rate to gain a controlling interest.

Examples of High-Profile Hostile Takeovers 

Some examples of high-profile takeovers include:

– Kraft Foods taking over Cadbury in 2009.

– InBev taking over American beer brewer, Anheuser-Busch in 2008.

Many hostile takeovers are resisted, with around 30 per cent fended off, or are abandoned and fail. For example:

– Xerox Holdings Corp had to abandon its $35 billion hostile cash-and-stock bid for HP in March 2020 following the Covid pandemic creating unfavourable market conditions.

Why Does Musk Want Twitter So Badly? 

Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist”, has found Twitter a very useful way to build his brand and reputation, speak freely, and instantly reach and conduct polls with 80+ million followers on Twitter. Musk has made suggestions about how he would like to change the platform, e.g. adding an edit button for Tweets, and has expressed his concern that Twitter may not be living up to its free speech principles. It appears that Musk would like to not just control Twitter but also to make it more customised to his own requirements and to his own view of what a social media platform should be. He has also expressed willingness (perhaps if this takeover fails), like Trump, to set up his own social media platform, which may be the ‘Plan B’ that he says he has if the takeover fails. Even though he could afford it (being the richest person in the world with an estimated $264 billion), critics have said that it is unlikely that he would be able to quickly build anywhere near the same following as he could get by purchasing the long-established Twitter.  Musk also wants to use a hostile takeover to turn Twitter to a private rather than a public company. This is likely to be so that Twitter stock would no longer be traded on public exchanges (and most likely wouldn’t be so reactive to his free speech), and shareholders could be offered a fixed price for shares, there wouldn’t be a requirement to disclose financial information to investors every three months, and there may be less scrutiny. In 2018, Musk suggested that he intended to make Tesla private which resulted in a row over possible funding, a lawsuit, a settlement and Musk stepping down as chairman of Tesla’s Board.

Concerns 

Some of the concerns about Musk taking-over Twitter include:

– Worries about financing of the takeover (possibly needing to sell some of Tesla) and regulatory issues.

– Worries about how Musk will be able to balance his time between Tesla, SpaceX, and the Twitter Deal.

– Worries that Musk could have a detrimental effect on the culture within Twitter, which could rub-off on the value of the brand.

– Concerns over what some may see as his impulsiveness and freely speaking his mind possibly having a detrimental effect on the company.

Will Musk’s Hostile Takeover Bid Be Successful? 

Although Musk’s announcement didn’t have a huge effect on the share price and Twitter said it would consider the offer and make any decision based on what’s best for shareholders, the signs are, however, that Twitter aims to resist by adopting a so-called ‘poison pill’ strategy. This is where the target company dilutes an acquirer’s voting shares.

Also, some big Twitter investors, e.g. Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, have commented that Musk’s offer is too low and doesn’t come close to “the intrinsic value of @Twitter given its growth prospects”.

Other commentators have said that it is unlikely that Twitter would accept being controlled by one person.

As things stand now, Twitter looks like resisting and some expert commentators are suggesting that there is a less than 50 per cent chance that the hostile takeover bid will be successful.

What Then? 

If Twitter rejects the offer:

– Twitter could seek another “white knight” buyer.

– Musk may (as he suggested) reconsider his position as a shareholder in the company, thereby driving down the price of Twitter’s stock.

– Musk may decide to set up his own platform or use his “Plan B”, which is, as yet, unknown.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For Twitter and its larger investors who essentially think the offer is not enough and may be concerned that Musk may not provide the best fit with the company and its brand, Musk’s latest move towards a hostile takeover has prompted resistance. Although a high initial price for shares may look appealing to some shareholders, some may worry about what direction the company would go in and how what some see as Musk’s impulsiveness and keenness for free speech (and its potential negative effects) could affect the brand going forward. Also, having just one new person in control of a company he has criticised and said needs big changes may be a frightening prospect. Musk has also indicated that he would pull out as a shareholder and perhaps set up his own social platform if the deal didn’t go his way. This could perhaps have a souring effect anyway and possibly indicate that Twitter itself is not the important thing. The immediate road ahead for Musk and Twitter therefore looks potentially expensive and time consuming as one tries to raise funds while the other tries to resist. It remains to be seen just what will happen next.

In this tech-insight, we look at what Web 3.0 is, together with its main benefits plus some concerns about it.

What Is Web 3.0? 

Web3 / web3 / Web 3.0 (a term coined in 2014 by Ethereum co-founder Gavin Wood) is the next phase in the evolution of the Web. It is based on blockchain technology, the same technology behind cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Web3 incorporates concepts such as decentralisation and token-based economics, for example, “play-to-earn” video games with rewards in the form of crypto tokens, and NFT platforms where users can buy and sell fragments of digital culture (e.g. art). Within the Web3 idea, if for example, a user signs-up to a Web3 social network or trading venue they receive tokens for exchange (which increase in value if the platform becomes more popular) and have a say in the decentralised governance of that platform. Imagining a Web3 version of Facebook (Meta), for example, rather than selling aggregated user data and adverts, the platform’ users could monetise their own data, or even earn crypto-based rewards from other users, e.g. for posting interesting content.

What Were Web 1.0 and Web 2.0? 

Web 1.0 is known as the period from 1991 to 2004 when websites were mostly still static html pages and open protocols such as were HTTP, SMTP and FTP widely used. Most users were consumers rather than content producers.

Following-on from Web 1.0 (starting in 2004) came Web 2.0. This is the period where the Web was viewed more as a “platform” and saw a huge increase in users creating and uploading their own content to forums, social media platforms and networking services, blogs, wikis, and other services.

Benefits of Web3? 

Some have cited the benefits of Web3 as being:

– Creators having more opportunities to monetise their work and activities.

– Rather than just a few big social media companies having all the power and making all the decisions, Web3 platforms could be governed in a more democratic way.

– Users may have greater privacy as there would be fewer advertising-based business models.

Criticism of Web3? 

Not everyone buys into the idea that we have entered a new and distinct phase of the Web. Some of the criticism of the idea of Web3 includes:

– It could simply be an attempt to re-brand cryptocurrencies and escape from some of the bad publicity they’ve had, e.g. volatility, security issues, their usage by scammers and opposition from some countries. Some also believe Web3 is an attempt to push the popularity and wider adoption of blockchains forward.

– Concerns that the Web3 vision is one of a purely commercial pay-to-play Internet where even social interaction is traded.

– Concerns about the idea that people may be given a blockchain-based, permanent online reputation score and record that could be used by others to make decisions about them, e.g. employment.

– Venture capital firms have invested heavily in Web3 projects prompting concerns that rather than being controlled by users, investors and centralised (rather than decentralised) tech platforms will have the power.

Navigating In Web3 

Browsers appear likely to evolve to enable users to better manage their Web3 interactions. For example, Opera’s new iOS version of its Crypto Browser is designed for accessing Web3 and has a non-custodial, built-in crypto wallet.  Users can also access Web3 NFTs and decentralised apps through the browser while being protected by an ad tracker, pop-up blocker, cookie dialogue blocker, and cryptocurrency mining protection.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

On the plus side, Web3 appears to hold the promise of more monetisation and investment opportunities for businesses and individual content creators, other non-advertising-based business models, as well as perhaps facilitating the wider usage (and the benefits that brings) of cryptocurrencies.  Blockchain is already being used by many businesses and looks as though it will be providing the bedrock for the growth phase of Web3. On the minus side, Web3 may create a more complicated and costly business environment where many of the free, enriching aspects of the Web are lost. Some fear that what we are seeing now may simply be a re-branding exercise by cryptocurrencies and a move by venture capitalists to gain more power. Although the Web is constantly evolving and changing at a relatively fast pace and Web3 may hold new opportunities, it takes time for many real-world businesses to learn about, understand, and be willing to take risks with new tech ideas and models, so it remains to be seen how Web3 will evolve.