The tech mogul’s platform is the first to get hit with charges under new EU social media law.
The European Union is calling Elon Musk to order over how he turned social media site X into a haven for disinformation and illegal content.
The EU Commission on Friday formally charged X for failing to respect EU social media law. The platform could face a sweeping multi-million euro fine in a pioneering case under the bloc’s new Digital Services Act (DSA), a law to clamp down on toxic and illegal online content and algorithms.
Musk’s X has been in Brussels’ crosshairs ever since the billionaire took over the company, formerly known as Twitter, in 2022. X has been accused of letting disinformation and illegal hate speech run wild, roll out misleading authentication features and blocking external researchers from tools to scrutinize how malicious content on the platforms spreads.
The European Commission oversees X and two dozens of the world’s largest online platforms including Facebook, YouTube and others. The EU executive’s probe into Musk’s firm opened in December 2023 and was the first formal investigation. Friday’s charges are the first-ever under the DSA.
Infringements of the DSA could lead to fines of up to 6 percent of a X’s global revenue.
I don’t go on that shithole site, but it seems like he not just letting disinformation go wild, but banning info
And promoting disinfo. The blue checkmarks are basically just a way to pay for prioritized disinformation-spreading.
DSA enforcement is spicy, since the EU can create its own team to fight disinfo on Twitter, and charge it to Musk, in addition to the massive fine.
Please tell me that, as someone outside the EU, I also reap the benefits of this spicy awesomeness.
As long as Twitter does business in the EU, it has to follow the law.
I can just imagine them hiding offending tweets in the EU only and letting the rest of us suffer.
It would be easier to just delete them but, well, musk.
Also, he just says he’s autistic. As far as is known, he’s never actually gotten an evaluation.
So he’s not just using autism as an excuse, he might not even have autism. And he wouldn’t, sadly, be the first to pretend he did to excuse his behavior.
The Autistic Community doesn’t deserve to mentioned in the same sentence as his.
What if Musk pulls Twitter out of the EU? What fraction of their revenue is that, I wonder?
Normally this would be too crazy to even consider, but… this is Musk we’re talking about. I’m sure he hates the EU government’s guts already. And that totally sounds like an impulse decision he would make.
Win win?
Hmm…EU citizens would be winning, but who else?
Musk could keep doing whatever it is he’s doing right now.
He could not though - losing the EU would be a win for him how?
Musk could keep doing whatever it is he’s doing right now.
I think his main motivation for continuing to run the company is to spread his agenda. If it only costs him a small percent of revenue to keep pushing Nazi taking points, thenbi think he’ll just pay the fines.
hehe, double the fines every day of noncompliance. I heard you like fines, so I added some fines on your fines and some fines on top of those to go with your fines. Don’t fuck with EU regulators.
Even without doubling, fines on a regular basis can hurt. Norway imposed $100k fine on FB on a daily basis, and FB is scrambling to do something about it, especially before other countries in the EU follow suit
100k isn’t that much. However, if the EU decides to go for the total 6% of global revenue it will cost Musk a shitload of money.
100k is a lot when you consider how small Norway’s population is. If you extend that same ratio per capita to the rest of the EU, FB would go broke.
OK, you got a point there.
You raise an interesting point, but Norway isn’t in the EU, is it?
For many intents and purposes, Norway uses the same laws and regulations the EU does. In this particular case, it’s just about setting an example
As someone who works in the field, DSA-like regulation is coming to many countries over the next couple years. We also have regulations on political ads that are similar to DSA already in many countries already. Mega platforms like X have little choice but to get compliant
We can only hope he does. More people move over to mastodon with large companies running their own instances in the ecosystem.
This would allow for a federated broadcast system similar to how Twitter is now used, but if mastodon gets critical mass and governments start using it like they do Vichy Twitter it would be great news.
If that leads to some extra government grants for the further development of mastodon and the fediverse… Possibly even under the guise of standing up to big american tech… we all win.
But if he does, he signed the Death warrant of his own platform. A lot of governments and mega corps are there because of users. Governments will all need to replace it immediately if they find out their main broadcasting platform could be turned off tomorrow.
You’d be hard-pressed to find a government institution in the EU above the municipal level which doesn’t have a mastodon server or account on some government server.
deleted by creator
I also read the term and though… this fits.
Twitter served a purpose as it allowed yelling into a crowd and people interested could tune into your yelling. Especially for official announcements it was great. I see that there is a need for a broadcast method for companies and even more for governments. Mastodon seems to fit better. It allows them to run their own server and keep it closed so no need to moderate users but still able to have reach.
A lot of companies that loudly “pulled out of Russia” are still working in Russia.
Twitter’s business is advertising. If they shun the EU, EU companies just aren’t allowed to buy ads without getting in hot water themselves.
He always complies with everything e.g. Turkey and many authoritarian governments want without a peep. The EU (and an even more shocking example: Brazil) are the only chumps who let him troll with impunity. Time to change that.
This a French scientific study showing how the Russian regime tries to influence the political debate in France with Twitter accounts, especially before the last parliamentary elections. The goal is to promote a party that is more favorable to them, namely, the far right. https://hal.science/hal-04629585v1/file/Chavalarias_23h50_Putin_s_Clock.pdf
In France, we have a concept called the “Republican front” that is kind of tacit agreement between almost all parties, left, center and right, to work together to prevent far-right from reaching power and threaten the values of the French Republic. This front has been weakening at every election, with the far right rising and lately some of the traditional right joining them. But it still worked out at the last one, far right was given first by the polls, but thanks to the front, they eventually ended up 3rd.
What this article says, is that the Russian regime has been working for years to invert this front and push most parties to consider that it is part of the left that is against the Republic values, more than the far right.
One of their most cynical tactic is using videos from the Gaza war to traumatize leftists until they say something that may sound antisemitic. Then they repost those words and push the agenda that the left is antisemitic and therefore against the Republican values.At this point is there even a single country that Russia isn’t undermining? They are actively paying German far right politicians.
At this point is there even a single country that Russia isn’t undermining?
All countries with UHC. Although it can be argued that countries without UHC are undermining themselves.
Putin on the other hand undermines every country. Even Russia.
Sorry, what does UHC mean?
Universal Healthcare
Thanks. Russia has certainly helped undermine the UK, which has UHC. There was Russian funding involved in Brexit campaigns, some of the UK’s right-wing populists (e.g. Nigel Farage) have apparent Russian connections and support, and Russian social media campaigns support the far right in election campaigns. Brexit was certainly a blow to the country.
I mean, yea. Of course it has become a haven for disinformation. That’s why he bought it.
Is 6% of global revenue enough? Or is that just a foot note in the books on the cost of doing business?
It’s 6% of revenue, not profit. So it cuts even more into profits as it doesn’t allow a company in breach of regulations to reduce the impact of the fine by adding expenses that will temporarily lower their profit.
Even more spicy, they can also impose periodic penalties up to 5% of the average daily worldwide turnover for each day of delay in complying. That shit can bankrupt you.
6% of profit would mean that EU owes twitter money.
Or Musk could pull Twitter out of the EU.
That would be so wonderful. The EU economy would probably take off just from the saved time/brainpower, lol.
Thank you for showing me the teeth behind this ruling. If non-compliance carries harsher consequences, it may be enough
That could realistically be around 1/3 yearly profit in a reasonable company (18% operating margin is common). No idea whether Twitter is currently profitable (it wasn’t when he bought it).
An example could be AliExpress, with a 130B in revenue and 11B in profit (2023), it would reduce their profit to 3.2B with the 6% fine. That’s a whopping 70% less profits, and cutting expenses isn’t gonna fix it either.
Question still stands, is it enough?
yeah it seems big enough that it might be cheaper to hire moderators
Hire? There’s enough nazis dying to get that job for free.
I mean that seems reasonably punishing yeah, not nearly the hours worth of profit usually charged to companies breaking the law. I believe the EU can even enforce its own content moderation on the site and charge the costs of that to Musk so its pointless for a company to not follow the laws at that point …
Musk will buy a company and tank it for the memes. I don’t think a warning shot like this will sway his decisions on the direction of said company. The people making the decisions aren’t culpable, the company is. The people making the decisions will just leave to a different company and we can start the whole process over again.
I hope it’s enough and I sound like a bitter old man.
Then he can tank it for the memes. Do that to enough companies and the “weird genius techbro” mask starts slipping and the venture capitalists no longer want to bankroll you and you start being seen as a liability.
God that would be great to see, what a temper tantrum that would be.
Historically, no, because companies still misbehave, the fines aren’t high enough for them to not try and see whether they get away with stuff.
OTOH, historically, yes, because once fines come flying companies shape up.
That is, they’re willing to gamble on that initial fine, but absolutely won’t tank the recurring fines for continued infringement.
Only 6%? That needs a zero slapped onto the end of it.
Still, it’s revenue (not just profit)
They need to first move out their official’s accounts out of twitter If they really want to lead by example, there is Threads and mastodon and what not!
Seeing how Facebook and Instagram have been shutting down posts about Israeli atrocities in Gaza. and deleting Palestinian Journalists accounts, Such moves to try and police what is fake news and what isn’t by governments according to their own interests and biases is an attack on free speech and freedom of the press.
They already post on Mastodon https://ec.social-network.europa.eu/@EUCommission
Am guessing it’s the case of trying to be on all social media platforms where people are.
Thierry breton himself does’t post on mastodon, If my memory is right he had an account on mastodon but doesn’t post there! celebrities need and audience that’s why they are hooked to Twitter and are trying to shape it to their liking.
The European Commission oversees X and two dozens of the world’s largest online platforms
Sometimes it’s fun to be a grammar Nazi.
Knowing that omitting the word “other” implies that the hangout of REAL Nazis is at most the 25th largest online platform is one of those times 😁
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The European Union is calling Elon Musk to order over how he turned social media site X into a haven for disinformation and illegal content.
The platform could face a sweeping multi-million euro fine in a pioneering case under the bloc’s new Digital Services Act (DSA), a law to clamp down on toxic and illegal online content and algorithms.
X has been accused of letting disinformation and illegal hate speech run wild, roll out misleading authentication features and blocking external researchers from tools to scrutinize how malicious content on the platforms spreads.
In preliminary findings, the Commission said X’s platform so-called blue checks had misled users into thinking some content was trustworthy when it wasn’t necessarily.
The platform also didn’t respect an obligation to provide a searchable and reliable advertisement repository and limited access to its public data to researchers, the Commission said.
The EU so far launched investigations under the DSA into companies including AliExpress, Meta’s Facebook and Instagram and TikTok over alleged problems like insufficient consumer protection and addictive algorithms.
The original article contains 389 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 56%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Fucking finally!
…and they are only 1 year too late…
Maybe provide an alternative? Ban EU politicians from using Twitter for their official accounts
That would work against data harvesting (which Twitter obviously also does), but not against the spreading of disinformation.
oh no, what are they gonna do?? what are WE gonna do?? ;```````````(
Not saying this out of any support for Elon or Twitter, just because I respect free speech.
It would be nice if the US pushed back on the EU on this type of thing. Going after platforms for the speech of their users, especially with a government mandated monetary incentive behind it, is an open door for censorship and unfairness. A US company, born under the auspices of a nation where free speech is literally rule number one, should be defended by the US government when other nations create rules attempting to stifle that free speech (especially when those rules also come with huge fines which siphon money, however much, from the US economy).
Governments should be developing ways to stop bots and botnets not stifling human public expression, no matter how disagreeable to the political sensibilities of those governments that expression may be.
Going after platforms for the speech of their users,
The EU is going after X for selling blue check marks while marketing them as a sign of trustworthiness. They claim this is misleading. They’re not going after X for anything the users said.
The issues with the US bulling their way in here is that while they set themselves up as the arbiters of free speech… these are not your counties. These are democratic institutions who have made independently made these decisions based on their concepts of what constitutes safeguarding the welfare of their citizens. They have determined that repeat targetted provably untrue propaganda based out of intellectual dishonesty that is designed to leave people angry at minorities creates conditions where people logically come to the conclusion that the killing, oppressing and subjugation of people to the point they see death as preferable to life is not okay.
The version of “free speech” that constantly gets toted as a universal good is essentially an experiment. When you see how something is functionally shaping your society and you see that while aspects of it are very healthy and cause additional stability and protection to people but a misuse is causing some people to be treated as subhuman then it’s time to amend the rules. A government should be held accountable for the welfare of all it’s citizens and those non-citizens whom it has temporary sovereignty over. Each country has the right to determine how best to initiate that directive. You are very welcome to defend your version of free speech as defined by American sensibilities on American ground, but American meddling in the ethics of countries whose value systems deal in more nuance would be very unwelcome. Quite frankly since the application of “free speech” under American terms has caused so much political stratification in their own homeland to the point where civil war or a breakdown of other democratic norms are snowballing they need to see to their own house before they can critique other nations.
US companies can
fuck offwithdraw from the EU.Also the US is not pro free speech. The first amendment only prevents the government from censoring not private entities such as twitter and other social media. They can in fact and do censor their users so them crying wolf about being censored themselves is ironic. After all they are not even human unlike (well some of) their users.
Free speech protects journalists from being imprisoned for reporting on events in the world, with the angle to the story they see fit.
Free speech is not about preventing any old fart spewing actual falsifiable lies/misinformation from being silenced on a privately owned platform.
Free speech also isn’t about choosing to disregard anti-misinformation laws in other parts of the world, in the name of said old farts’ rights to say anything, but still insisting on serving customers in those same parts of the world.
That’s what EU is fighting against. Misinformation spread on a platform serving EU customers is finable. If Twitter/X wants to stick to free speech principles without being fined, they have two options.
- combat misinformation/lies (this isn’t anti free speech)
- geoblock the EU. Don’t do business here
In many European countries, there’s no American style free speech, there are laws that forbid some contents, such as racism, sexism and lgbtq-hate. People get fined and associations are dissolved because of it frequently.
I understand the argument for not letting a government control speech, because it seems against democratic. But when you see what’s happening to the USA where about half the voters are voting for someone who wants to undermine its democracy, attack women, the poor and the minorities, maybe you would think that the impact of free hate speech on democracy can be destructive.Oh you mean the same government that was revealed to have worked with Twitter to ban political opposition under the same reasoning of misinformation and hate speech?
