EU officials say X’s paid-for blue check deceives users and breaks law
- Reference: 1720789745
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/07/12/eu_officials_say_xs_paidfor/
- Source link:
In preliminary [1]findings , the Commission — an executive branch of the European Union — found that the way X had implemented the blue checkmark cheats users since anyone can subscribe to obtain such a "verified" status.
Until November 2022, Twitter — as it was then — used the blue check mark to show that it had taken steps to verify the user's identity. It was often applied to accounts of celebrities, politicians, journalists and commentators who might be the target of impersonators.
[2]
Shortly after Tesla and Space X CEO Elon Musk [3]bought the platform in October 2022, he [4]introduced a subscription system to the platform where those paying would get the blue checkmark displayed.
[5]
[6]
EC officials said the move meant users could not make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with. There was also evidence of motivated malicious folk abusing the ability to become "verified accounts" to deceive users.
A Commission official said X's decision to prioritize content from blue checkmark accounts in reply feeds misleads users too. “A normal user will not be aware that the priority replies are coming from accounts that are not necessarily trustworthy and unreliable. You can buy yourself into prioritization by buying blue checkmarks, and we think this is misleading.”
[7]
X's use of the blue checkmarks breached the provision in the DSA to ban use of dark patterns, features of an online platform interface designed to manipulate or mislead users into choices they do not mean to make, the EC said.
Thierry Breton, commissioner for internal market, said: “Back in the day, BlueChecks used to mean trustworthy sources of information. Now with X, our preliminary view is that they deceive users and infringe the DSA. We also consider that X’s ads repository and conditions for data access by researchers are not in line with the DSA transparency requirements. X has now the right of defence — but if our view is confirmed we will impose fines and require significant changes.”
The Commission launched its [8]investigation into X in December last year , in one of the first actions brought under the newly introduced DSA, legislation designed by the world’s richest trading and political bloc to hold Big Tech to account.
[9]
The Commission also published preliminary views that X had failed to meet DSA requirements on transparency on advertising on the platform. Officials said the social media company did not offer a searchable and reliable advertisement repository. Instead it introduced features and access barriers that made the repository unfit for its transparency purpose towards users, they argued.
[10]Trump threatens to send Meta's Mark 'Zuckerbucks' to prison if reelected president
[11]Apple, Google, ease cross-cloud data transfers, perhaps with costly catch
[12]Anonymous 'ask me anything' chat app NGL ordered to knock it off targeting kids
[13]FBI, cyber-cops zap ~1K Russian AI disinfo Twitter bots
In addition, X failed to provide independent researchers with a usable API to access public data on the platform, instead creating barriers with “disproportionally high fees,” the Commish said.
Under the DSA, Big Tech companies can be fined up to six percent of global turnover — around $2.5 billion in X’s case.
Following the publication of the EC's preliminary findings, X can defend itself by examining the documents in the Commission's investigation file and offering its reply.
We asked X to comment. ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3761
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZpFTGaXB5@hRSNziCUgAHwAAAM8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/27/musk_sink_twitter/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/10/official_twitter_musk_payment/
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZpFTGaXB5@hRSNziCUgAHwAAAM8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZpFTGaXB5@hRSNziCUgAHwAAAM8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZpFTGaXB5@hRSNziCUgAHwAAAM8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/25/google_eu_dsa/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZpFTGaXB5@hRSNziCUgAHwAAAM8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/11/trump_zuckerberg/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/11/apple_gogle_photo_cloud_interoperability/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/11/ngl_messaging_app/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/09/russian_ai_bot_farm/
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
"Authentication" would be better wording.
Blue check for authentication would allow meaningful attribution.
Besides you could not produce millions pseudo-authentic personalities.
“A normal user will not be aware that the priority replies are coming from accounts that are not necessarily trustworthy and unreliable . You can buy yourself into prioritization by buying blue checkmarks, and we think this is misleading.” [my emphasis]
Fox would be the opposite, reliably untrustworthy
The European Commission is an executive branch
The EU is a collection of institutions charged by the member states with enforcing the laws of the Union. While it's oftern termed the EU's government this is incorrect as it's a closer to a civil service. It does enjoy some perogatives, such as the ability to negotiate trade deals, but all treaties must be endorsed by the member states.
Re: The European Commission is an executive branch
BBBBBBOT
Re: The European Commission is an executive branch
Charlie Clark,
I think it's reaonsable to call the European Commission the executive. Admittedly the EU is an odd organisation, so nothing quite fits. But it's in charge of running departments and spending budgets (although a lot of its budget is actually spent in member countries jointly with their own governments). It also has exclusive competences, such as trade or the Single Market, where the Commission - where it does make the decisions. As you say, it can make trade deals. So long as they only relate to trade, then they member states don't get a say. It can also pass Regulations - which are laws passed by the Commission alone in its areas of sole competence.
It's a bit more than a civil service. After all it has Commissioners (political appointees) who have departments that are almost ministries. They're much more like US cabinet ministers than say British ones.
On the other hand you've also got the European Council (heads of government) and the Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) - which are other components of the EU that sometimes (often) compete for power with the Commission. And then the weird legislation system where for EU Directives (model legislation that the states must enact into compatible laws) - they can only be initiated by the Commission but are voted on by Parliament and drafted in Trilogues (meetings between Commission, Parliamentary leaders and Council of Ministers).
Re: The European Commission is an executive branch
Very informative, thank you!
Re: The European Commission is an executive branch
Exactly, it is a bureaucracy with additional powers – similar to a US government agency perhaps – but this is a long way from being an executive. It takes its instructions from the member states when it is not doing what is defined in the treaties.
You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Let's be honest, X is now the public facing branch of the dystopian hellscape that is 4Chan.
Re: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
I don't know... 4chan has proven useful occasionally.
> 4Chan
and be called "Propaganda Social".
Orange Jesus would be long forgotten blip of US politics, unless billions (?) spent by Putin to promote him in social media. Similar how Putin's cult has reached the level of Stalin's all over the world. Both cases are not coincidences.
Big Tech companies can be fined up to six percent of global turnover
Every piece of news on the heinous actions of big tech ends with a variation of that text... Can it really happen? Will it really happen some day?
The meaningful fines are in the books, but sadly it doesn't mean any regulator will ever have the spine to even attempt it.
Just look at the related news below this one: If Twitter's actions. or Google's CPU monitoring add-in in Chromium, or Meta's pay-or-consent scheme are not enough for the regulators to take decisive action, then what, in the ever-loving name of Nyarlathotep, is??
Back in the day, BlueChecks used to mean trustworthy sources of information
Really? Fox News never had a blue tick? Maybe better to say that the tick implied that it really was who you thought it was...?