Analyzing Elon Musk’s Claims Against the European Commission

Elon Musk, the CTO and chairman of X, has publicly accused the European Commission of offering the social media platform an “illegal secret deal” to censor speech in order to avoid fines in the EU. Musk made these claims on social media in response to the EC’s publication of preliminary findings from an investigation under the Digital Services Act (DSA). According to Musk, the EC proposed that X quietly censor speech without disclosing it to the public in exchange for not imposing a fine. Musk also stated that other platforms accepted this deal, but X did not. He expressed readiness for a public court battle regarding this issue.

European Commission’s Findings

The European Commission’s investigation found that X was not in compliance with the DSA in various areas, including dark patterns, advertising transparency, and data access for researchers. The report highlighted that X’s “Blue checkmarks” and verified accounts could mislead users, as they can be obtained by anyone and are often exploited by malicious users. The report also criticized X for lacking a searchable and reliable advertising repository, setting up barriers to supervision and research, and restricting access to public data for eligible researchers. X’s terms of service prohibit scraping, and its API access process discourages researchers with high fees.

Potential Consequences

The European Commission’s preliminary findings indicate that X could face substantial fines, amounting to up to 6% of its global annual revenue if found guilty of non-compliance. In addition to financial penalties, X may need to resolve the issues raised in the investigation to continue its operations in the EU. The decision could also involve increased oversight and periodic penalty payments.

Elon Musk’s accusations against the European Commission and the subsequent findings of the investigation shed light on the potential regulatory challenges faced by X in the EU. The company’s reputation, operational continuity, and financial health could be at stake depending on the outcome of this dispute. It remains to be seen how X will navigate this situation and whether it will comply with the DSA requirements to avoid legal repercussions.