Will Elon Sue? NBC News Finds, Yet Again, That ExTwitter Has ‘Verified’ Neo-Nazi Accounts, With Ads Appearing Next To Their Content

from the free-speech-absolutism-sure-seems-different dept

Elon Musk does not seem to like it much when reports point out that ExTwitter appears to have a neo-Nazi issue. Of course, he could respond to these reports by noting that, as a “free speech absolutist,” that includes those who support Nazism, as distasteful as that is, but he stands by that horrific speech because of his belief in free speech.

That would suggest some sort of principles, even if you might consider them confused and distorted principles, at the very least.

However, the last few times organizations have pointed out the propensity of neo-Nazi content on ExTwitter, Elon Musk has done the opposite of committing to “free speech absolutism.” Instead, he’s sued those who reported on it. In August of last year, he sued the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). That lawsuit was recently tossed out of court as an obvious SLAPP suit.

And then, in November, he sued Media Matters for its report on advertising from big companies appearing next to content posted by neo-Nazis. Actually, he sued them twice. Once in Texas and then again in Ireland. He also urged state Attorneys General to go after Media Matters as well, which both Texas’ Ken Paxton and Missouri’s Andrew Bailey have done. Just last week, the court blocked Paxton’s investigation as clearly an attempt to suppress free speech.

In other words, while Musk could have taken a “free speech absolutist” response to these claims, he has instead chosen to take a “I believe in free speech for neo-Nazis, but not for anyone who criticizes me” approach to these things.

And, look, if you’re looking to create chilling effects and silence other critics, that could work. In the Paxton ruling that came out last week, it was revealed that Media Matters has chosen not to publish other stories it was working on about ExTwitter out of fear of further legal action. That is the very definition of abusing state power to suppress speech.

However, such tactics can also backfire in a big way. After Musk sued Media Matters, we noted that it caused a lot more people to begin investigating neo-Nazis on ExTwitter.

And now, the latest is NBC News, which has published a report highlighting that it has found 150 verified accounts on the site pushing pro-Nazi content.

NBC News found that at least 150 paid “Premium” subscriber X accounts and thousands of unpaid accounts have posted or amplified pro-Nazi content on X in recent months, often in apparent violation of X’s rules. The paid accounts posting the content all consistently posted antisemitic or pro-Nazi material. Examples included praise of Nazi soldiers, sharing of Nazi symbols and denials of the Holocaust. 

The pro-Nazi content is not confined to the fringes of the platform. During one seven-day period in March, seven of the most widely shared pro-Nazi posts on X accrued 4.5 million views in total. One post with 1.9 million views promoted a false and long-debunked conspiracy theory that 6 million Jews did not die in the Holocaust. More than 5,300 verified and unverified accounts reshared that post, and other popular posts were reshared hundreds of times apiece. 

To be clear, Musk has every right to set his policies however he wants. And that can include not just allowing neo-Nazis to post bigoted, false, hateful propaganda on his site, but even to have their accounts “verified” (which, of course, no longer means “verified” in any real sense).

Also, given the number of users on ExTwitter (large, though shrinking), it’s entirely reasonable to argue that the company doesn’t realize it has all these neo-Nazi accounts, or that they are verified accounts. Many people wouldn’t believe that, but it’s also a possible explanation if the company doesn’t want to just flat out say “we’re the Nazi bar, all are welcome.”

Of course, as with the Media Matters’s report, NBC also found ads running on many of these accounts, including ads from some big name companies:

NBC News found ads running on 74 of the 150 premium accounts, either on their profile pages or in the replies below their posts. The advertisers included SiriusXM, The Hollywood Reporter and Cisco subsidiary Splunk. SiriusXM declined to comment. Penske Media, the owner of The Hollywood Reporter, declined to comment. Splunk did not respond to requests for comment sent by email. 

Ads from other companies appeared among the search results for a Holocaust-denial hashtag. 

Again, it’s entirely possible to argue that this is due to mistakes made in the vetting process. But, if that’s how Musk was going to argue this, he could have said that in response to Media Matters’ report a few months ago. Instead, he sued. Twice. And convinced states to open bullshit investigations.

So far, at least, ExTwitter hasn’t threatened to sue NBC News. The company whined that NBC only provided it with 13 examples, rather than the full 150. But, of course, it’s not NBC News’ job to help ExTwitter find the neo-Nazis on its platform:

Image

Meanwhile, Elon has responded to an account claiming that the NBC story was debunked (it has not been) by effectively confirming the story and suggesting that 150 accounts is a pretty small number.

Image

And, this is a perfectly reasonable response. But it would sound a lot more honest if Musk hadn’t sued two other organizations for reporting similar things. Also, at no point did NBC suggest that it had found all of the neo-Nazis posting on the site. Indeed, the article admits that it only did a relatively simple search and reported what it found.

Again, there are all sorts of ways that Musk and ExTwitter could respond to this, but so far, it’s choosing some of the silliest ways (though, at least Musk isn’t talking about lawsuits… yet).

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: nbc news, twitter, x

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Will Elon Sue? NBC News Finds, Yet Again, That ExTwitter Has ‘Verified’ Neo-Nazi Accounts, With Ads Appearing Next To Their Content”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
60 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Bloof (profile) says:

Re:

He doesn’t want to get rid of the Nazis because he wants to use Twitter to radicalise as many normies as possible before the elections or it becomes too much of a financial millstone for him to carry. Elon wants to normalise the beliefs of the worst kinds of sh*theads and shove the Overton window as far to the right as possible so the billionaire class face as little pushback as possible the next time that they Americans attempt to install a white nationalist dictator.

NotTheMomma (profile) says:

The day after Elon made his first announcement about buying twitter or offering to buy it, I knew he would be the death of it. People talk about how you can sue for anything and everything under the sun here in the US. What they need to do is, people who file more than one obvious slapp suit has a fine of 5% of their yearly income and it goes to the person being slapped. Eventually they might learn.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

The NBC writer mentions 150 accounts but only provided information to X on 13 accounts (of which we acted on) […]

So the article hasn’t been spiting so much nonsense and may have even be useful.
Maybe NBC should explain to Twitter how to make this kind of “relatively simple search” to find some problematic accounts.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Bloof (profile) says:

Re: 'Don't talk to us, journalists!' 'Why won't journalists talk to us first?'

The same Twitter that spent a year autoresponding to journalists with a poop emoji? The same Twitter that still just shrugs in response to reports of hate speech from users while autocensoring the word cis? I’m sure they’d be suuuuper responsive to inquiries and suggestions from NBC.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Twitter's reply is disengenuous

There’s no need for NBC – or anyone else – to provide a list of Nazi accounts on Twitter. It’s trivially easy to find by typing “Nazi” into the search bar.

The point? Twitter KNOWS who the Nazis are. They get to stay because Elon loves them. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to find out that he belongs to at least one Nazi organization.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

I am legit confused why NBC didn’t give any details on its numbers. When Pro Publica or Ars Technica or any number of other highly respectable news outlets make such claims, they almost always provide links to their source material and documents. Pro Publica will regularly even run separate articles where they not only cover all their sources in detail, but also explain how and why the sources were meaningful. Makes it a lot harder for Mushbrain and his fellow Reichwingers to claim they’re just being persecuted by the vicious liberal media.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re:

Because they’re probably not anything like what they’re saying they are.

The vast, VAST majority of antisemitic and holocaust denier posts out there are Hamas supporters. Probably dwarf actual white supremacists 1000/1. But if you had an anti-right wing agenda, you could kinda squint and pretend, since they say largely the same things about Jews and Israel.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

The NBC article provides no citations at all, making it impossible to verrify

And apparently only provided 13 of the examples to Twitter?!? Why? So the whole the whole thing is hearsay? That indicates they’re hiding an awful lot.

This is really important. Leftists lie about what is “pro-nazi”, racist, hate speech, etc all the time. It’s actively part of the political game.

  • I know you guys hate to hear it, but BY FAR the most common source of antisemitic or holocaust denier content online is from anti-israel hamas supporters. They probably dwarf actual neo-nazis/white nationalists by I dunno (I’m guessing here) a thousand to 1, and they have almost nothing in common politically besides hating Jews. But if you squinted (and wanted to misrepresent) you could pretend those were “pro-nazi”. And if you were a left leaning “journalist” (and NBC is very far left these days) you absolutely would want to do that.
  • There is very famous gimmick of “white nationalist hand symbol” by which they mean the ffing OK sign. I think this has fallen out of favor since people got wise to it, it was infamously used in the case of Kyle Rittenhouse, where some enterprising “journalist” tried to pretend that he was a nazi, giving no context, but suffice to say it probably was never ever used as a white supremacy symbol, only ever means OK, and that was just a lie reporters told you. Point being that journos need to provide facts to back up the things they tell you cuz you can’t trust their characterizations.
  • There’s a simple fact that a lot of the far left (including here on TD) will call basically anyone conservative “nazi”. Probably not what’s happening here, but still, I do not trust their opinion.
  • Lastly there are innocent, historical reasons to quote nazi propaganda and people should be allowed to non-innocently repeat nazi propaganda including denying the holocaust because that’s what free speech means.

The fact that NBC provided citations for none of these accounts means they know their characterizations would be disputed and should not be believed.

This is all very different than the Media Matters lawsuit, where they provided concrete examples and lied about how those results came about. MM has then lied about this lawsuit on MANY occasions. An explainer here:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/11/media-matters-picked-on-the-wrong-guy/

(Yes, it’s a conservative site. This is a hyper liberal site. Ad hominem gets you no points)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

The NBC article provide no citations

And apparently only provided 13 of the examples to Twitter?!? Why? So the whole the whole thing is hearsay? That indicates they’re hiding an awful lot.

This is really important. Leftists lie about what is “pro-n@zi”, racist, hate speech, etc all the time. It’s actively part of the political game.

  • I know you guys hate to hear it, but BY FAR the most common source of antisemitic or holocaust denier content online is from anti-israel hamas supporters. They probably dwarf actual neo-nazis/white nationalists by I dunno (I’m guessing here) a thousand to 1, and they have almost nothing in common politically besides hating Jews. But if you squinted (and wanted to misrepresent) you could pretend those were “pro-nazi”. And if you were a left leaning “journalist” (and NBC is very far left these days) you absolutely would want to do that.
  • There is very famous gimmick of “white nationalist hand symbol” by which they mean the ffing OK sign. I think this has fallen out of favor since people got wise to it, it was infamously used in the case of Kyle Rittenhouse, where some enterprising “journalist” tried to pretend that he was a nazi, giving no context, but suffice to say it probably was never ever used as a white supremacy symbol, only ever means OK, and that was just a lie reporters told you. Point being that journos need to provide facts to back up the things they tell you cuz you can’t trust their characterizations.
  • There’s a simple fact that a lot of the far left (including here on TD) will call basically anyone conservative “n@zi”. Probably not what’s happening here, but still, I do not trust their opinion.
  • Lastly there are innocent, historical reasons to quote nazi propaganda and people should be allowed to non-innocently repeat n@zi propaganda including denying the holocaust because that’s what free speech means.

The fact that NBC provided citations for none of these accounts means they know their characterizations would be disputed and should not be believed.

This is all very different than the Media Matters lawsuit, where they provided concrete examples and lied about how those results came about. MM has then lied about this lawsuit on MANY occasions. An explainer here:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/11/media-matters-picked-on-the-wrong-guy/

(Yes, it’s a conservative site. This is a hyper liberal site. Ad hominem gets you no points)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

And apparently only provided 13 of the examples to Twitter?!? Why? So the whole the whole thing is hearsay? That indicates they’re hiding an awful lot.

This is really important. Leftists lie about what is “pro-n@zi”, racist, hate speech, etc all the time. It’s actively part of the political game.

  • I know you guys hate to hear it, but BY FAR the most common source of antisemitic or holocaust denier content online is from anti-israel hamas supporters. They probably dwarf actual neo-nazis/white nationalists by I dunno (I’m guessing here) a thousand to 1, and they have almost nothing in common politically besides hating Jews. But if you squinted (and wanted to misrepresent) you could pretend those were “pro-nazi”. And if you were a left leaning “journalist” (and NBC is very far left these days) you absolutely would want to do that.
  • There is very famous gimmick of “white nationalist hand symbol” by which they mean the ffing OK sign. I think this has fallen out of favor since people got wise to it, it was infamously used in the case of Kyle Rittenhouse, where some enterprising “journalist” tried to pretend that he was a nazi, giving no context, but suffice to say it probably was never ever used as a white supremacy symbol, only ever means OK, and that was just a lie reporters told you. Point being that journos need to provide facts to back up the things they tell you cuz you can’t trust their characterizations.
  • There’s a simple fact that a lot of the far left (including here on TD) will call basically anyone conservative “n@zi”. Probably not what’s happening here, but still, I do not trust their opinion.
  • Lastly there are innocent, historical reasons to quote nazi propaganda and people should be allowed to non-innocently repeat n@zi propaganda including denying the holocaust because that’s what free speech means.

The fact that NBC provided citations for none of these accounts means they know their characterizations would be disputed and should not be believed.

This is all very different than the Media Matters lawsuit, where they provided concrete examples and lied about how those results came about. Mke has then lied about this lawsuit on MANY occasions. An explainer here:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/11/media-matters-picked-on-the-wrong-guy/

(Yes, it’s a conservative site. This is a hyper liberal site. Ad hominem gets you no points)

This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
freakanatcha (profile) says:

Elon is looking at this all wrong...

This isn’t a problem, it’s an OPPORTUNITY.

There are any number of major advertisers with a history of being associated with Nazis and may see a benefit to having ads being placed adjacent to neo-Nazi accounts. The neo-Nazi audience may well be receptive to a brand story that speaks to its legacy of supporting Nazis!

Linda, I’ll spot you some leads to get started: Ford, GM, VW, Hugo Boss, Audi, BASF, Allianz, IBM, Bayer, Merck.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

'That one is LITERALLY quoting Hitler.' 'Paid account?' 'Yes?' 'Move on then.'

Elon: How dare you not list all of the accounts you found in a quick search rather than only the most notable ones, that’s going to make it much harder for us to perform our own ‘internal review’ and clear them of all wrongdoing since they’re paid accounts and those can do no wrong!

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

If you were about free speech, you wouldn’t be complaining about others speech on others platforms or what that platform did or didn’t do regarding said speech.

Criticism is not censorship⁠—it is the expression of an idea. Publishing criticism of someone else’s speech/actions (and their reaction to that criticism) is an exercise in free speech. That includes your criticism of Techdirt and any criticism of your (short-sighted, misinformed, and ultimately bad faith) opinion.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

You are literally defending literal NAZI’s by calling out Palestine?

This is like… the worst possible comparison. You should be offended at ELMO for this, not defending him.

Everywhere I go on the net, I see anonymous off topic comments bringing up Israel just like this. Its enough to make me wonder how much the Israeli government (and by extension the USA, via GENEROUS long term aid) paid for it.

I dont get it, but I guess whatever botshit NSO groups ChatGPT clone spits out just serves to muddy the waters for real debate.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

What about the real nazis?

So, the Republican Party, and their collaborators the Zionists, who have successfully weaponized the Holocaust to force all the Jews to move to Israel for some quasi-religious reason?

The very same groups that actively quash genuine criticism of modern Israel and the Zionists?

If you were about free speech, you wouldn’t be complaining about others speech on others platforms or what that platform did or didn’t do regarding said speech.

1A allows everyone to do just that, dipshit.

Unless what you really mean is “Only me and my group are allowed to complain and not you!”

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

It’s almost as if there’s a deliberate effort to radicalize the right, silence anyone who opposes this effort, and make it such a clickbait spectacle, we can’t NOT talk about it. Conveniently, this also has the effect of hogging headlines and diverting attention away from issues like: homelessness, wealth redistribution, women’s rights, child labor, or a university gagging their valedictorian when she might upset the defense contractors affiliated with said university.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...