Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Syt]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/apr/23/twitter-restores-blue-tick-free-of-charge-to-celebrities-in-u-turn

Twitter restores 'blue tick' free of charge to celebrities in U-turn

Decision to reinstate 'verified' status without distinguishing paid-for from free users prompts criticism for 'false advertising'

Not surprised by the very stable genius.

[Tamas]

[Syt]

https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/26/twitter-disinformation-dsa-risk/

EU warns Twitter over disinformation after Musk policy shifts found to boost Kremlin propaganda

Twitter was only confirmed yesterday as one of 19 major tech platforms subject to centralized oversight by the European Union's executive starting this fall, when so-called very large online platforms (VLOPs) are expected to be compliant with the Digital Services Act (DSA). But the Commission has not wasted any time warning the Elon Musk-owned social network that things aren't looking good for staying on the right side of the incoming law.

The DSA requires major platforms to take steps to mitigate systemic risks like disinformation, while breaches of the regime can attract penalties of up to 6% of global annual turnover. On Twitter's 2022 revenue, such a fine could sum to over a couple of hundred million dollars — with the caveat that the platform's revenue may not hold up this year, given Musk's erratic antics scaring away advertisers and alienating plenty of users.

In a pair of tweets sent out today, Vera Jourova, the EU's values and transparency VP, warned of "yet another negative sign" by Twitter — accusing the platform under Musk of "not making digital information space any safer and free from the Kremlin #disinformation & malicious influence".

Her tweets cite an AP report on research by Reset, a London-based non-profit that tracks the spread of propaganda by authoritarian regimes, which found that recent policy changes at Twitter have significantly amplified state-backed disinformation on the platform — namely Musk's decision to remove state-backed labels from accounts operated by authoritarian governments in Russia, China and Iran and also to lift restrictions on algorithmic amplification of their content.

Per Reset's research, Kremlin propaganda saw a visibility boost of around a third. AP's report also cites earlier research by the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, which found that Musk's decision to remove the state-affiliated labels appears to have reversed a decline in followers for many of the accounts.

"To me this is a signal that #Twitter is falling short of its commitments to the anti-disinformation Code," Jourova went on. "This is a paramount test to show they are serious about respecting the Code and ultimately compliance with the #DigitalServicesAct."

The bloc backed restrictions on two Russian state-affiliated news channels (RT and Sputnik) in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine last year. The step included not only prohibitions on traditional broadcast media from screening the channels but a legal requirement that online platforms avoid distributing their content too.

At the time of writing Twitter users trying to access the two prohibited channels from inside the European Economic Area or the U.K. (which also imposed limits) are met with a notification that the account is "withheld" across 28 countries.

However users can circumvent the ban by, for example, using a VPN and changing their location to a country where the accounts are not withheld. And if they do that they will find that, as a result of Musk's changes rowing back on prior anti-disinformation policies, these accounts are longer labeled as state-affiliated nor are they algorithmically de-amplified.

Jourova's comment vis-a-vis "respecting the Code" is a reference to the EU's Code of Practice on Online Disinformation — which Twitter voluntarily signed up to back in September 2018, when Musk was just a high profile Twitter user, not its erratic billionaire owner.

As we reported at the time, the initial EU Code was a weak bite at tackling what was then still sometimes being referred to as 'fake news'. But the EU went on to present a beefed up version of the Code last summer. And while the mechanism remains voluntary (i.e. self regulation, rather than legally binding rules), the bloc's lawmakers have signalled that the Code's commitments will count towards future compliance with the DSA.

Ergo, on the flip side, not meeting the commitments to combat disinformation should count as a black mark against DSA compliance for any signed up VLOPs — which are, under the DSA, required to proactively assess systemic risks like disinformation and put in place effective mitigation measures while also taking steps to avoid harming freedom of expression.

The Commission will be technically empowered to enforce against DSA breaches by VLOPs from late August/September — when a four-month implementation period expires for the first wave of larger platforms. So Twitter still has a few months to get its house in order. (Or, more realistically, pick up the smithereens left by Musk's wrecking ball and try to put a coherent content moderation policy approach back together.)

Although there's actually a longer lead in for the Code commitments to bite as the mechanism can't be officially linked to the Commission's enforcement framework for the DSA until after a European Board for Digital Services has been set up — which is not expected until the deadline for the general entry into application of all DSA provisions (in February next year).

This means Musk probably has until early 2024 (at least) to play regional disinformation chaos agent — before any hard DSA-based reckoning lands over his love of 'democratizing' authoritarian propaganda.

That said, it's interesting to see the EU getting in so early with public warnings to Musk on disinformation. Which may be a sign the Commission feels its facing some risk here too. Not least the risk that Twitter's presence as a continued signatory to its anti-disinformation Code while its owner is actively ripping up anti-disinformation policies — and has himself been accused of spreading Kremlin propaganda — is, to put it diplomatically, pretty damn awkward.

The Code being self-regulation also ties the EU's hands in the sense that they can't prescribe who joins it nor boot existing signatories out for making a mockery of provisions like Commitment 18 — to "minimize the risks of viral propagation of misinformation or disinformation by adopting safe design practices as they develop their systems, policies, and features" — something Twitter was still technically signed up to at the last check.

Yet, again, it looks hard to square an on-paper claim by Twitter that it's committed to shrinking the risks of viral disinformation with policy decisions by Musk U-turn on promoting state-affiliated propaganda channels; tearing up rules on COVID-19 misinformation; or simply blowing up the legacy verification system and replacing it with what looks like an intentionally confusing mess whereby scammers and spammers are encouraged to pay $8 to get their content automatically amplified over non-paying users.

Given the lag between the EU's disinformation Code getting hard linked to the DSA as a key mitigation measure — as expected — and the delicate dance ahead of the Commission to enforce rules in an area as tricky and slippery as (subjective and often politically charged) disinformation the bloc appears to have decided it can at least make some noise decrying Musk's blatantly bad faith approach in public in the meanwhile.

I'm sure when pressed to comply he will take a measured response, like blocking all EU IP addresses on the platform.

[Josephus]

He's gonna be on Bill Maher tomorrow.

[Syt]

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/02/1173422311/elon-musk-npr-twitter-reassign

Elon Musk threatens to re-assign @NPR on Twitter to 'another company'

Elon Musk has threatened to reassign NPR's Twitter account to "another company."

In a series of emails sent to this reporter, Musk said he would transfer the network's main account on Twitter, under the @NPR handle, to another organization or person. The idea shocked even longtime observers of Musk's spur-of-the-moment and erratic leadership style.

Handing over established accounts to third parties poses a serious risk of impersonation and could imperil a company's reputation, said social media experts.

"If this is a sign of things to come on Twitter, we might soon see even more of a rapid retreat by media organizations and other brands that don't think it's worth the risk," said Emily Bell, a professor at Columbia Journalism School who studies social media. "It's really an extraordinary threat to make."

Last month, NPR effectively quit Twitter after Musk applied a label to the news organization's account that falsely suggested it was state-controlled. Other public media organizations, including PBS and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, followed suit and stopped tweeting following similar labeling.

Musk has since removed the labels, but the outlets originally targeted have not resumed public activity on Twitter.

In an unprompted Tuesday email, Musk wrote: "So is NPR going to start posting on Twitter again, or should we reassign @NPR to another company?"

Under Twitter's terms of service, an account's inactivity is based on logging in, not tweeting. Those rules state that an account must be logged into at least every 30 days, and that "prolonged inactivity" can result in it being permanently removed.

Musk did not answer when asked whether he planned to change the platform's definition of inactivity and he declined to say what prompted his new questions about NPR's lack of participation on Twitter.

"Our policy is to recycle handles that are definitively dormant," Musk wrote in another email. "Same policy applies to all accounts. No special treatment for NPR."

The threat of retaliation is the latest volley in a months-long conflict between Musk and established media organizations since the billionaire purchased Twitter in October.

Musk has long attacked the media and attempted to undercut the credibility of journalists. The Twitter CEO has suspended reporters who have published or promoted stories critical of him. Musk has stripped away, and at times reissued, "verified" blue check marks to news organizations and individual journalists.

By recently making "verified" blue checks available for purchase, Musk has created a turbulent social media landscape, blurring the lines for users between what is real and what is fake on one of the most influential social networks.

His remark on Tuesday that he may transfer NPR's primary Twitter account with nearly 9 million followers to another entity is typical of how Musk has run the social media site.

As is often the case with Musk, it is not clear whether he will follow through on the threat.

One former Twitter executive was taken aback by the remark, telling NPR that such a threat should be alarming to any business operating on the site, since it indicates that acquiescing to Musk's every whim may be necessary in order to avoid being impersonated.

For most of its 17-year history, Twitter has had rules that maintained a certain level of order and offered both individuals and organization some control over their presence on the platform.

NPR CEO John Lansing has previously said he lost faith with "decision-making at Twitter," and that more time is needed in order to determine if Twitter can be trusted again.

A spokeswoman for NPR declined to comment further.

Musk, whose statements to reporters are regularly laced with jokes, insults or attempts at trolling, responded sarcastically when asked who would potentially take over NPR's Twitter account.

"National Pumpkin Radio," Musk wrote, adding a fire emoji and a laughing emoji to describe the content of the fictional gourd-themed broadcaster. "NPR isn't tagged as government-funded anymore, so what's the beef?"

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Tech Reporter Bobby Allyn and edited by Business Editor Lisa Lambert. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

[Jacob]

The beef is that engaging with mercurial bullies on their terms is a waste of time. Applying more mercurial bullying is not going to persuade folks otherwise.

[The Minsky Moment]

Translation: Musk confesses to the willfulness element of a prospective trademark infringement claim.

[Syt]

So apparently Musk sent another email (at 2:19 am) after NPR published the article. No text, just the subject line "You suck."

Someone at NPR printed and framed the email.

[HVC]

Such a child. Yet he still has so many fan boys fawning over him.

[Admiral Yi]

Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

I found this interesting.

[Tamas]

Such a child. Yet he still has so many fan boys fawning over him.

Maybe because they would like to act the same childish way but the world and their own timidity are forcing them to behave.

[Jacob]

Such a child. Yet he still has so many fan boys fawning over him.

Maybe because they would like to act the same childish way but the world and their own timidity are forcing them to behave.

I think you're right that they'd like to be able to act similarly. I'd expect that they wish they had the insulation against consequence that comes with being a billionaire. It makes sense to be more timid in your petulance when you may actually have to pay a price for it.

[PDH]

I think you're right that they'd like to be able to act similarly. I'd expect that they wish they had the insulation against consequence that comes with being a billionaire. It makes sense to be more timid in your petulance when you may actually have to pay a price for it.

In their dreams, all men are douches

[crazy canuck]

It was not so long ago one of our regulars argued that despite all Musk's flaws, the world would be better off with 50 more Musks.  That particular person probably regrets making that argument so stridently.  But the Musk fan club would still make the same argument.

[The Minsky Moment]

Musk making an ass of himself on twitter is not an edifying spectacle but it's not clear there is much broader societal harm.

On the flip side, there a case to be made that because of Musk, the timeline to transition to electric cars has been materially accelerated by the demonstration case provided through Tesla and the kick in the ass given to Detroit, Wolfburg, etc.

Then there is the benefits of SpaceX in terms of strengthening US based launch capabilities (previously a Russian near monopoly) and lowering of launch costs.  And the value of his provision of satellite communication services to Ukraine in its most desperate hours.

Bottom line, Musk is no Rupert Murdoch where the world would be a better place if his entire life's work were wiped out.

50 Musks would probably be too much to handle.  Another 3 or 4 might be worth putting up with.