[ad_1]
Elon Musk’s X is planning a change in how the blocking function works, breaking the standards of other social media apps. When policies around blocking change, people who have been blocked by someone will still be able to see that person’s posts, as long as they are public. They won’t be able to like, repost, or reply to these posts.
“Banning public posts doesn’t make any sense,” Musk said. He said On X last year. “It should be neglected in favor of a stronger form of muting.”
Jack Dorsey, former co-founder and CEO of Twitter, agreed. In a sense, Dorsey and Musk are right. On most social media platforms, if someone blocks you, you can still find their public posts — all you have to do is log out of your private account. But Tracy Chu, founder of the anti-harassment tool Block Party, says that extra bit of friction is important.
Chu books On
Many X users agreed with Chou, which led to increased interest in other platforms. Added Bluesky, a Twitter alternative Another 1.2 million ShQers Over the past couple of days, as users have been searching for an alternative to X. At the top of the charts in the US App Store, Bluesky has risen to second place in the social networking category, up from 181st place the day before.
These growth spurts do not always translate into long-term use. But, unlike some other platform updates — like changing its name from Twitter to X — this policy change isn’t just symbolic. It’s a move that prioritizes the experiences of people who are blocked, rather than those doing the blocking, who are often more directly at risk.
“Today, users can use blocking to share and hide malicious or private information about people they have blocked,” said the X Engineering Team books In a job. “Users will be able to see if this behavior is occurring with this update, allowing for more transparency.”
This situation can be off-putting for users who care more about their safety than in this chosen scenario, as they could be blocked by someone who then shares information about them.
Claire Waxman, who works in the Mayor of London’s office as a designated victims commissioner, is also concerned about how the changes will affect victims of abuse.
“This is a dangerous decision for the social media platform, and it will have serious implications for victims — especially those who are being stalked — and their safety,” Waxman said. books On
Colten Misner, an assistant professor at North Carolina State University who studies social media harassment, agrees.
“The blocking feature was the first line of defense for people being harassed,” Meissner told TechCrunch. “There seems to be no other way to explain this policy change than to say, ‘Victims of harassment, your first line of defense, we are now going to remove them.’ Because if you want views, if you want visibility, that’s what comes with X.”
Meissner also sees a trend in how Musk’s personal beliefs and revenges are reflected in the platform’s politics.
“(Musk) is definitely the archetype of the person who got banned, so it feels like a bit of childish revenge,” Meissner said. “Elon specifically has had this history of making policy changes at his own whim.”
For example, X suppressed links to its competitors, such as Substack and Mastodon At different times. The platform also once singled out NPR as a “state media,” which is usually reserved for publications that do not enjoy editorial independence from their government (NPR receives less than 1% From its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting).
On a platform that has already produced a significant rise in hate speech, the changes to the ban feature are a harbinger of the same trend continuing.
“This policy change is just a huge step back in the history of harassment,” Meissner added.
[ad_2]