Faced with government demands, Twitter’s variable geometry responses

The social network X has been blocked in Brazil since Saturday, August 31, following a decision by the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court. Internet users who connect to it using a virtual private network (VPN) are liable to a fine of 50,000 reais (8,000 euros). The origin of this decision: a standoff between the Brazilian justice system, which requested the blocking of seven accounts, and X, which preferred to close its office in the country to try to circumvent the request. A standoff that is also manifested by a direct conflict between Alexandre de Moraes, judge of the Federal Supreme Court, and Elon Musk, who nicknamed the latter “Voldemort” – Harry Potter’s enemy in the saga of the same name.

However, since he bought Twitter for around €45 billion at the end of 2022, Elon Musk has repeatedly agreed to block accounts on his social network at the request of courts, or even directly after receiving orders from governments, without a judicial decision. In March 2023, Twitter blocked 122 accounts, including some belonging to opposition politicians and Indian journalists, at the request of Narendra Modi’s government. In February 2024, the social network agreed to block 42 additional accounts, while the country was experiencing a major protest movement by farmers, while announcing that it before the courts.

In Türkiye in May 2023, the social network had also agreed to block at the request of the government, in the midst of the presidential election campaign. Elon Musk, who regularly presents himself as a die-hard defender of freedom of expression, explaining that he had to choose between “see access to all of Twitter slowed down, or limit access to some tweets.”

Beyond these two high-profile cases, Twitter, which has since become X, has generally responded more favorably than in the past to government requests since its acquisition by Elon Musk. An analysis conducted by the independent media Rest of World noted that in the six months since the acquisition, the social network has responded favorably to 80% of requests for information or removals from states, compared to 50% under the previous management. It is difficult to gauge how the situation has changed since then: the company no longer publishes, as it used to, transparency reports detailing the requests it receives and the fate reserved for them.

You have 47.08% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.