X’s Recent Policy Stances are Being Put to the Test With Israel Conflict

X’s recent, more “free speech” aligned approach to content moderation is being put to the test, with various groups seemingly now using X’s more lax enforcement processes to spread misinformation across the war in Israel, which was sparked by militant group Hamas launching a large-scale assault on Israeli residents over the weekend.

Amid rising tensions, many individuals within the region have turned to X for real-time updates, which has once more made it a priceless breeding ground for partisan propaganda.

Indeed, in keeping with evaluation conducted by disinformation protection group Alethea, various coordinated groups at the moment are posting false and inflammatory X updates related to the Israel-Hamas war.

As reported by NBC News:

“[Various] accounts — lots of which previously focused on more innocuous topics like skilled basketball or life in Japan — previously showed no outward association, but suddenly began posting similar content over the weekend as news of the attacks broke. In lots of cases, the accounts would post the very same phrases. It’s not clear if the accounts were created for the express purpose of posting the misinformation, or in the event that they were hacked or sold.”

In response, X says that it’s treating the conflict “as a crisis requiring the best level of response”, which has resulted updates to Community Notes to get them up on posts faster, with the intention to maximize crowd-sourced fact-checking, while it’s also announced a change to its Public Interest Policy, which can see more people in a position to keep posts related to the conflict energetic, within the interests of ensuring users are higher informed.

However the reports of widespread disinformation have also sparked deeper scrutiny, with EU Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton issuing a public call to X owner Elon Musk directly, asking him to “urgently make sure that your systems are effective” in coping with misinformation and hate speech within the app.

In response, Musk called on Breton to provide examples of those alleged infringements, to which Breton said that Musk is in a position to motion such based on reports just like the one from Alethea, together with other independent evaluation groups, which have also found similar trends.

Though, after all, Musk’s various supporters, who now get priority exposure within the app through X Premium, have taken Breton’s response as a signal that there actually is not any such evidence, which is essentially Musk’s aim in making such public stances. Musk has now deployed this tactic several times, effectively dismissing such claims by calling for specific data to be shared in public, though he too could also share the identical specifics by providing data on exactly what X has and has not actioned.

The truth is, Musk and his team are logically one of the best placed to supply such disclosure, as outside research groups, lots of whom at the moment are hampered by reduced insight, on account of X upping the worth of its API access, are only in a position to assess a fraction of overall posts within the app.

X has all of the info, and Elon’s keen to tout the open, transparent nature of his team. Why not share all the data that it has to counter any such claims, letting analysts then dig into what’s actually happening, based on X’s perspective. 

On the other hand, much of the priority stems from the proven fact that Musk has also cut various elements of X’s moderation systems, including regional staff reductions and software replacements, along with its recent rules around what’s and isn’t acceptable within the app. Musk himself has also been sharing his own views on the conflict, and being the most-followed user within the app, that’s also helped to contribute to the broader debate across the facts of the conflict, sparking more attention on certain elements.

Which, in turn, can also be spooking regulators and officials, though the actual evidence, from either side, is fairly thin without delay, not less than by way of what’s been shared in public.

But effectively, nobody believes that X goes to give you the chance to take care of adequate enforcement of misinformation around major conflicts like this, based on the noted changes on the app. Which is putting X under more scrutiny, and while other platforms are also coping with misinformation in their very own apps, it’s X, specifically, that’s under the microscope, which is being amplified much more by Elon’s self-involvement within the discussion and discourse.

The situation continues to be evolving, so we don’t have the evidence as yet. However the signs, based on various reports, are that more mis- and disinformation is proliferating on X, and that the corporate’s heavier reliance on crowd-sourced fact-checking, via Community Notes, is probably going not enough to deal with all incidences as effectively as it might have been under past Twitter management.

But that system wasn’t perfect either, so it could possibly be that X can also be being unfairly targeted, due again, to its cost-cutting measures. X still stays hugely influential in such situations, and officials are keeping an in depth eye on the way it’s in a position to manage such, in keeping with Elon’s stated “free speech” approach, and that might mean that X goes to be under more pressure than ever, just because it’s put the highlight on itself on this respect.

It’s also somewhat interesting to notice how X, and Elon himself, is addressing this latest incident, in variance to its approach to other conflicts.

Elon, to this point, seems loads less excited about commenting on government requests in India, or tensions in China, which could possibly be because his other company, Tesla, is seeking to expand its business interests in each regions. That’s less of a priority in Israel, which is one other wrinkle to watch inside Elon’s various stances and statements.

In any event, we don’t have all of the evidence without delay, but independent groups are criticizing X’s lack of enforcement capability, while X is claiming to be doing all that it will possibly to deal with such, as quickly as possible.

It’s a vital test, which could find yourself resulting in an even bigger review of the longer term of the app.