Twitter has once again courted controversy with a policy update that to some appears designed to protect right-wing extremists on the app, setting off another wave of discourse in recent days.

Earlier this week, Twitter, or X, updated its privacy policy to ban the revealing of a person's name if it is not publically available on the app. "The identity of an anonymous user, such as their name or media depicting them" is now a protected item on Twitter if it deems that information is shared "with abusive intent, or to harass another person."

While not directly referenced in the update, many online have speculated it was made due to the recent and highly publicized doxxing of StoneToss by an Antifa collective.

Last week, the group used a mix of articles and social media post history to suggest that the name of the controversial webcomic artist was someone named "Hans Kristian Graebener." Technically, they did so without using information that was not public and did not post Graebener's address or other personal details, nor did they post pictures that weren't on Graebener's social media accounts.

However, they were still banned from the platform, prompting a piece in Wired about Twitter's perceived scramble to stem the spread of information released in the StoneToss dox. The day after that story was published, Twitter updated its privacy policy.

Twitter / daithgilbert

Many believe the timing of this new rule indicated that it will be applied selectively to protect right-wing extremists and figures online, though this is merely conjecture. They argued that the practice of revealing someone's anonymous identity with the intent to court harassment has been liberally practiced by accounts including LibsOfTikTok and Andy Ngo for years while Twitter did not punish them.

For example, in early October, Ngo published the name and state of Juniper, a popular left-wing irony account, which had been posted on the app previously by two other accounts with smaller followings, though they did not mention the state of residence.

Twitter / esjesjesj

The update was perceived by many on the platform to be further proof of Elon Musk's supposed whims towards making Twitter a hub for right-wing ideas in contrast to his stated commitment to "free speech."

Twitter / isaiah_bb

Twitter / "davesavedlatinhttps://twitter.com/davesavedlatin/status/1771050278768308706

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Musk shared yet another video that critics have argued pushes the Great Replacement Theory. In November, he caused advertisers to back out of Twitter by amplifying a Great Replacement Theory conspiracist.

Editor's Note: A small portion of this article was edited on March 25th to provide clarification on a statement made.


Share Pin


Comments 5 total

Geigh Science

I do not respect you if you are in favor of people you politically disagree with being doxxed. Simple as that. It's all fun and games until your "mUh SoCiAl JuStIcE" vigilantism gets someone actually killed, whether by being swatted or just stalked and murdered by a deranged and misguided psychopath who takes things just a single step further and decides killing someone for their political beliefs is surely OK, because they did a wrongthink and the ends justify the means.

This is just a road that you do not want to go down.

4

JCampbell7

The fuck are you talking about "a road that you do not want to go down"? You're already doxxing and killing us. You're just upset that it can happen to you now.

This is just levelling the playing field.

0

Revic

I've got no problem with this policy change unto itself. Perfectly reasonable change to make. But it's awfully exasperating that it only came about, after so many other people going through the same thing were utterly ignored, because Elon Musk saw a chance to ingratiate himself further to the only people who seem to tolerate him these days. It's like when a politician finally decides to take action on something they should have ages ago because it finally affected someone close to them. And the someone in question is an asshole. We'll see if the actual enforcement ends up as selective as the implementation. I expect to see a lot of mumbling inaction and circuitous justifications made if one of Musk's favorites runs afoul of it, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

10

:̶.̶|̶:̶;̶

I don't like pebblechuck (subsequently pebblesneed) and the site formerly known as Twitter.com can't shut down soon enough, but this is a good policy.

9

Luzno Lindo

This seems like yet another case of people not agreeing with a privacy policy until they are the ones who end up having their privacy violated. Once they are the ones with their real names and such out in the open, there is not a doubt in my mind their tunes would change immediately.

9
pinterest