vpnedict.com – Ellon Musk: Twitter Suing Threads Because They ‘Cheat’. Ever notice how some tweeters seem to get way more likes and retweets than others? You’ve probably seen those threads that go viral, racking up tens of thousands of engagements in a matter of hours.
Well, according to SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Twitter might actually be suing some of those viral thread creators. In a recent tweet, Musk claimed that Twitter is pursuing legal action against accounts that use bots and other “tricks” to artificially inflate the popularity of their tweet threads.
Twitter Files Lawsuit Against Automated Threads
Twitter is cracking down on automated tweet threads, claiming they’re unfairly manipulating the platform. In a lawsuit filed this week, Twitter alleges that companies selling automated tweet threading services are enabling users to “cheat” and gain more likes and retweets.
These services allow you to enter a long piece of text, like a blog post or essay, and the service will break it up into a series of connected tweets for you. All you have to do is copy and paste the tweets and schedule them to publish on your profile. The problem, according to Twitter, is that these pre-threaded tweets are designed to game the system and make the threads appear more popular than they really are.
•The lawsuit specifically calls out services like Thread Reader App, Twittory, and Threadify. These companies have built their businesses around offering automated tweet threading to users.
•Twitter argues that by pre-threading content, these services ensure the tweets get more likes and retweets since people can easily like and retweet the entire thread with one click. This makes the threads seem more popular and go viral more easily.
•The lawsuit also alleges that these services often rotate and repost old thread content to gain more traction, and they frequently tag celebrities and influencers to increase visibility – all tactics that violate Twitter’s spam and automation rules.
While tweet threading services have become popular as a way to share longer stories and posts on Twitter, it seems their tactics have finally caught up to them. Twitter is seeking damages and an injunction against these companies, claiming they’ve been depriving Twitter of revenue and damaging the user experience. The outcome of the lawsuit could dramatically impact how people share content and go viral on Twitter.
Musk Claims Twitter Is ‘Censoring Free Speech’
Elon Musk is no stranger to controversy on Twitter. His latest tweets accuse the social media platform of “secretly censoring free speech.” According to Musk, Twitter has been suspending accounts that share or engage with certain threads because they see them as “cheating to get ahead.”
Musk claims these threads, which often go viral and receive thousands of likes and retweets, are being censored simply due to their popularity and success. He argues that if people find the content interesting or provocative, Twitter should not punish the accounts behind these threads. Musk sees this as a free speech issue, stating that “Twitter has become a de facto public town square, so censoring free speech there is unacceptable.”
Many have questioned Musk’s allegations, unsure of what specific threads or accounts have actually been suspended. They argue that Musk, who has frequently criticized Twitter policies in the past, may be exaggerating or misrepresenting the situation. However, others agree with Musk that any form of censorship on the platform is a slippery slope.
Keep Reading : Can You Use VPN on Threads
If Musk’s claims are true, it raises questions about how much control Twitter has over curating content on their site and who gets to determine what qualifies as “cheating.” While some regulation is necessary to prevent the spread of misinformation, overly strict policies could discourage authentic viral interactions and limit free expression. The issue essentially comes down to finding the right balance of moderation.
Overall, Musk’s thought-provoking tweets have once again highlighted ongoing tensions between free speech and censorship on social media. The saga continues in what has become a frequent cycle of criticism and debate surrounding Twitter and their influence over public discourse. The company will likely face further scrutiny as additional details surrounding the situation come to light.
The Rise of Automated Social Media Threads
The rise of automated social media threads has been controversial. Some see them as “cheating” the system, while others view them as simply using the tools available.
Twitter threads that are scheduled and posted automatically are a prime example. Certain tools allow you to draft an entire thread in advance, then schedule each tweet to post at optimal times for maximum engagement.
While some see this as cheating because you’re not physically tweeting in real-time, others argue that you’re still creating the content and using tools to better connect with your audience. If the goal is to spread a message or story, does it really matter whether each individual tweet is posted manually or automatically?
On the other hand, automatically generating threads from trending topics or reposting old evergreen content could be viewed as low quality. If little effort or originality is involved, and the primary goal is clicks or retweets rather than providing value, it may not foster genuine connection or discussion.
There are good arguments on both sides. As with any technology, social media automation tools can be used constructively or abused. The rise of automated threads is a complex issue with many trade-offs to consider regarding authenticity, productivity, and meaningful engagement.
Keep Reading : Tips how to use threads
Perhaps the question comes down to intent and execution. If automated tools are used to thoughtfully engage with others at scale, they can be a net positive. But if used primarily for self-promotion or “gaming the system”, they may do more harm than good. As always, moderation and balance are key.
Overall, there are valid perspectives on both sides of this issue. The rise of automated social media threads and how they’re viewed depends greatly on how individuals and companies choose to implement them.
Do Automated Threads Violate Twitter’s Terms of Service?
Twitter’s terms of service prohibit accounts that spam, manipulate, or cheat the system. But do automated Twitter threads actually violate these terms? The answer is complicated.
On one hand, automated threads that repeatedly tweet the same content or spam followers with promotional messages would likely violate Twitter’s terms against spam and manipulation. However, many automated threads simply schedule and repost evergreen content to help build an engaged following. As long as the content provides value to followers and adheres to Twitter’s other policies, these types of automated threads are typically permitted.
Twitter’s policy on automation states: “You may not use Twitter’s services in a manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on Twitter.” But what does “artificially amplify” really mean? If an automated thread is reposting content that people genuinely want to engage with, it’s not really manipulating their experience or the flow of information.
The key factor in determining if an automated thread violates Twitter’s terms of service comes down to the intention and results. Threads aimed purely at spamming, manipulating, or deceiving users for promotional gain would be prohibited. But threads that schedule and repost high-quality content to better engage followers and build community may be perfectly acceptable, as long as they do not aggressively promote products or services.
In the end, the only way to know for sure if your automated Twitter thread complies with their policies is to carefully review Twitter’s terms of service and automation rules. If still unsure, it may be best to avoid automated threads altogether or reach out to Twitter support for clarification. The risks of violating their terms and facing penalties like account suspension are simply not worth it for most users and brands.
Twitter Users React: The Debate Around Automation and ‘Cheating’
Twitter users had a lot to say in response to Musk’s comments about “cheating.” Many argued that using automation tools isn’t cheating at all, especially for casual users and small businesses. After all, not everyone has the time or skills to manually post and engage with others on the platform.
Automation Allows More People to Use Twitter
For some, automation levels the playing field and allows more people to benefit from using Twitter. Scheduling tweets in advance, for example, means you don’t have to be glued to your phone 24/7 to post updates. Automated liking and following can help build your network and gain more exposure for your account. These types of automation don’t necessarily equal “cheating” or manipulating the system.
It Depends How Automation is Used
Other users pointed out that how automation is used matters more than simply using it. Aggressively spamming links or repeatedly tweeting the exact same content could be seen as manipulative behavior.
But using automation tools to efficiently do things you would ordinarily do yourself anyway, like scheduling original tweets, liking relevant content, and following accounts that interest you is unlikely to violate Twitter’s terms or damage the user experience.
Crackdown Could Hurt Small Businesses
Some expressed concern that a broad crackdown on automation could disproportionately impact small businesses, influencers, and casual users who rely on these tools but may not have the resources to manually do all their Twitter marketing and engagement. An outright ban could significantly limit how many people can benefit from the platform.
On balance, while irresponsible use of automation should be discouraged, for many users these tools simply allow them to use Twitter in a more practical and efficient way.
Rather than an outright ban, clarifying Twitter’s policy and guidelines on responsible automation use may be a better approach. The debate around this issue shows the diversity of opinions in the Twittersphere and the many ways people interact with the platform.
