European Commission investigating Elon Musk's social media platform X for deceptive verification practices and data access issues
Investigation focuses on alleged violation of regulations regarding dark patterns, advertising transparency, and data access for researchers
Musk decried blue checks as elitist and corrupt, introduced $8 per month verification model
Researchers express concerns about inability to independently access data or high fees
European regulators are investigating Elon Musk's social media platform X for allegedly violating regulations regarding dark patterns, advertising transparency, and data access for researchers. The European Commission accuses Musk of deceiving users and infringing on the Digital Services Act (DSA) by allowing anyone to purchase blue checks, which were previously used to verify the identity of influential accounts and signaled reliability. X faces potential fines if it cannot reach a resolution with the EU over these issues.
Before Musk took over X, blue checks were used as a trust indicator for users. However, Musk decried the arrangement as elitist and corrupt and introduced a new subscriber model allowing everyone to access verification for $8 per month. The EU argues that this deceptively affects users' ability to make informed decisions about the authenticity of accounts they interact with.
Additionally, researchers have expressed concerns about their inability to independently access data from X or are dissuaded from carrying out projects due to high fees. The commission is currently investigating these matters and has given X the right to defend itself against these allegations.
It's important to note that Musk has a strong libertarian and objectivist bias, which may influence his approach to regulations. He often criticizes government claims and mainstream media reports, raising questions about their accuracy and potential biases. However, it is crucial for journalists to remain neutral and provide factual information without bias or deception.
Elon Musk is being investigated by the European Commission for allegedly violating regulations regarding 'dark patterns, advertising transparency and data access for researchers'.
The European Commission accuses Musk of deceiving users and infringing on the Digital Services Act. X, which is Twitter, has been given the right to defend itself. If the commission’s view is confirmed, fines and significant changes will be imposed.
Elon Musk removed blue checks from some verified users in spring 2024 and then made them available for purchase for $8 a month.
Accuracy
The European Commission accuses Musk of deceiving users and infringing on the Digital Services Act.
The European Commission accused Elon Musk's X of hindering advertising transparency and failing to allow researchers to access public data.
X's use of the blue checkmark for verified accounts does not correspond to industry practices and has been abused by motivated malicious actors.
Accuracy
The European Commission accused Elon Musk’s X of deceiving users and infringing digital content rules, putting the social media giant at risk of a hefty fine.
Elon Musk removed blue checks from some verified users in spring 2024 and then made them available for purchase for $8 a month.
X faces fines of up to 6 percent of its global annual turnover if it cannot reach a resolution with the EU over the blue checks issue.
Deception
(30%)
The article contains several examples of deception: 1. The author uses the term 'motivated malicious actors' to describe individuals who have obtained a verified status on X and are using it to deceive users. This is an emotional manipulation as it implies that these individuals are intentionally trying to harm others, when in reality their actions may not be motivated by malice. 2. The author states that 'X did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.' This is selective reporting as the article does not mention whether or not other news outlets were also contacted for comment or if X has provided a response to them. 3. The author quotes Musk's statement about being offered an 'illegal secret deal' by the commission without providing any evidence to support this claim, which is a lie by omission as it implies that such a deal existed when there may not be any truth to it.
There was evidence of motivated malicious actors abusing the verified status to deceive users.
X did not.
The body's preliminary view is that X has broken rules regarding dark patterns, advertising transparency and data access for researchers.
X did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Fallacies
(75%)
The author makes an appeal to authority by quoting the European Commission's accusations against X without providing any analysis or context. She also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that X is at risk of a 'hefty fine' and that it could face 'significant changes'.
]The European Commission on Friday accused Elon Musk’s X of deceiving users and infringing digital content rules, putting the social media giant at risk of a hefty fine.[
Bias
(80%)
The author accuses X of using 'dark patterns' which is a loaded term that implies deception and manipulation. While the article does go on to explain what this means in the context of X's use of verified accounts, it sets up a negative tone by using this term. Additionally, the author quotes Margrethe Vestager as stating that X 'does not comply with the DSA in key transparency areas' without providing any specific examples or evidence beyond the allegations made by the European Commission.
In our view, X does not comply with the DSA in key transparency areas, by using dark patterns and thus misleading users.
The commission accused X of deceiving users and infringing digital content rules, putting the social media giant at risk of a hefty fine.
X has now the right of defence – but if our view is confirmed we will impose fines & require significant changes.
The EU has threatened X with millions of dollars in fines for allowing paid-for blue checks on its social media platform.
Before Musk took over X, blue checks were used to verify the identity of influential accounts and signaled that they were reliable sources of information.
Musk decried the arrangement as elitist and ‘corrupt to the core’ and introduced a new subscriber model allowing everyone to access verification for $8 per month.
X faces fines of up to 6 percent of its global annual turnover if it cannot reach a resolution with the EU over the blue checks issue.
Accuracy
Elon Musk removed blue checks from some verified users in spring 2024 and then made them available for purchase for $8 a month.
Deception
(30%)
The article contains selective reporting as it only reports details that support the author's position about the EU's criticism of X's paid blue checks. The author also uses emotional manipulation by implying that the EU is trying to 'come for' Elon Musk and X, and portrays Musk as a hero fighting against an elitist system. Additionally, there is no disclosure of sources in the article.
The EU said today, threatening the Elon Musk–owned platform with millions of dollars in fines unless the company makes changes...
Before Musk took over X, formerly known as Twitter, blue checks were used to verify the identity of influential accounts...
Despite those changes, the EU said on Friday that X’s verification system does not correspond with industry practice...
Fallacies
(90%)
The author makes several arguments in this article, some of which contain fallacies. The EU's position that paid-for blue checks on X deceive users and infringe the Digital Services Act (DSA) is presented as a fact without any evidence being provided to support this claim. This is an example of an Appeal to Authority fallacy, as the author relies on the EU's statement as if it were a proven fact. Additionally, there are several instances of inflammatory rhetoric used by both sides in this article, such as Musk's description of Twitter's previous verification system as 'corrupt to the core'. However, these do not necessarily constitute logical fallacies and are more a matter of tone and style than substance. The author also quotes EU officials making statements that could be considered dichotomous depictions (e.g., 'blue checks used to mean trustworthy sources of information. Now with X, our preliminary view is that they deceive users and infringe the DSA'). However, these statements are not fallacious in themselves as they represent the opinions of the individuals making them.
]European Commission officials said on Friday, because it 'negatively affects users' ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts.'[
X did not reply to WIRED's request for comment. But on X, CEO Linda Yaccarino hit back. '[a] democratized system, allowing everyone across Europe to access verification, is better than just the privileged few being verified.[']
Bias
(95%)
The author expresses a clear bias against Elon Musk and X's paid blue checks system. The author quotes EU officials stating that the system negatively affects users' ability to make informed decisions and deceptively infringes the DSA. The author also mentions previous controversies involving impersonator accounts with paid-for blue checks, specifically mentioning NBA star LeBron James as an example. Additionally, the author quotes EU internal market commissioner Thierry Breton expressing a negative view of the system and threatening fines if changes are not made. The author also mentions Musk's previous criticisms of the old verification system as elitist and corrupt, but does not provide any counterargument or evidence to challenge this perspective.
Before Musk took over X, formerly known as Twitter, blue checks were used to verify the identity of influential accounts... But Musk decried the arrangement as elitist and ‘corrupt to the core.’
EU internal market commissioner Thierry Breton said in a statement. ‘X has now the right of defense–but if our view is confirmed we will impose fines and require significant changes.’
Paid-for blue checks on social media network X deceive users and are abused by malicious actors, the European Union said today, threatening the Elon Musk–owned platform with millions of dollars in fines unless the company makes changes.
The European Union accused Elon Musk’s X platform of violating EU Digital Services Act on July 12, 2024.
X was charged with failing to comply with ad transparency rules under the DSA.
The commission found that X’s blue checks, which can be obtained by paying $8 per month, negatively affect users’ ability to make informed decisions about the authenticity of accounts and content they interact with.
Researchers cannot independently access data from X or are dissuaded from carrying out projects due to high fees.
Accuracy
Elon Musk is being investigated by the European Commission for allegedly violating regulations regarding 'dark patterns, advertising transparency and data access for researchers'.
X faces fines of up to 6 percent of its global annual turnover if it cannot reach a resolution with the EU over the blue checks issue.
Deception
(50%)
The article accuses Elon Musk's X platform of violating the EU Digital Services Act by having deceptive blue checkmarks and failing to comply with ad transparency rules. However, it does not provide any direct quotes from the author stating their own opinions or assertions about these issues, only reporting on the European Commission's accusations. It also mentions ongoing investigations into other tech companies but does not engage in editorializing or omission regarding those.
The European Union said Friday that blue checkmarks from Elon Musk’s X are deceptive...
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains two fallacies: Appeals to Authority and Dichotomous Depiction. The European Commission is presented as an authority on the matter of X's compliance with the EU Digital Services Act. However, no evidence is provided in the article to support this claim beyond the commission's statement that X falls short on transparency and accountability requirements. Additionally, there is a dichotomous depiction of blue checkmarks before and after Musk's acquisition of X. Before Musk's acquisition, they are described as trustworthy sources of information, while after his acquisition, they are described as deceptive and infringing the DSA.
]The European Commission outlined the preliminary findings from its investigation into X, formerly known as Twitter, under the 27-nation bloc’s Digital Services Act. The rulebook, also known as the DSA, is a sweeping set of regulations that requires platforms to take more responsibility for protecting their European users and cleaning up harmful or illegal content and products on their sites, under threat of hefty fines. Regulators took aim at X’s blue checks, saying they constitute ‘dark patterns’ that are not in line with industry best practice and can be used by malicious actors to deceive users.[
Since anyone can subscribe to obtain such a ‘verified’ status it negatively affects users’ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with.
But X’s ad database isn’t ‘searchable and reliable’ and has ‘design features and access barriers’ that make it ‘unfit for its transparency purpose.’
The company also falls short when it comes to giving researchers access to public data, the commission said. The DSA imposes the provisions so that researchers can scrutinize how platforms work and how online risks evolve.
But researchers can’t independently access data by scraping it from the site, while the process to request access from the company through an interface ‘appears to dissuade researchers’ from carrying out their projects or gives them no choice but to pay high fees.
Bias
(95%)
The European Commission accused X platform of violating EU Digital Services Act by issuing blue checkmarks to anyone who paid $8 per month for one and called it a 'dark pattern' that negatively affects users' ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with. The commission also charged X with failing to comply with ad transparency rules by having an unsearchable and unreliable ad database, hindering researchers from looking into emerging risks from online ads.
But X’s ad database isn’t ‘searchable and reliable’, and has ‘design features and access barriers that make it unfit for its transparency purpose.’
]The European Commission said anyone can subscribe to obtain such a ‘verified’ status, which negatively affects users’ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with.[
