FILE - Computer monitors and a laptop display the X, formerly known as Twitter, sign-in page, July 24, 2023, in Belgrade, Serbia. Attorneys for X Corp. and a research organization that studies online hate speech traded arguments in court Thursday, Feb. 29, 2024, after the social media platform sued the non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate for documenting the recent increase in hate speech on the site since it was purchased by Elon Musk. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic, File)
FILE - Computer monitors and a laptop display the X, formerly known as Twitter, sign-in page, July 24, 2023, in Belgrade, Serbia. Attorneys for X Corp. and a research organization that studies online hate speech traded arguments in court Thursday, Feb. 29, 2024, after the social media platform sued the non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate for documenting the recent increase in hate speech on the site since it was purchased by Elon Musk. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic, File)
Attorneys for X Corp. and a research organization that studies online hate speech traded arguments in court Thursday after the social media platform sued the non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate for documenting the increase in hate speech on the site since it was purchased by Elon Musk.
X, formerly known as Twitter, alleges the center's researchers violated the site's terms of service by improperly compiling public tweets, and that its subsequent reports on the rise of hate speech cost X millions when advertisers fled.
U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer appeared skeptical during oral arguments Thursday in San Francisco, questioning X's attorney how the center violated any platform rules simply by reporting on posts that were already publicly available.
鈥淚 can't think of anything basically more antithetical to the First Amendment than this process of silencing people from publicly disseminating information once it's been published,鈥 Breyer said during back-and-forth with X's attorney.
The case is being watched closely by researchers who study social media and the way it both reflects and shapes public discourse.
In its suit, filed in the Northern District of California, San Francisco-based X alleges that the center's researchers improperly collected a vast amount of data for its analysis, using third-party software to 鈥渟crape鈥 the site. Such actions violated the terms of service that all users agree to, said Jon Hawk, an attorney for X.
The company is seeking millions of dollars in damages to compensate for lost advertising, and the staff time it took to look into how the center compiled its reports.
鈥淲hen they published the report and the advertisers saw the report, then they stopped spending money,鈥 Hawk said.
Attorney John Quinn, arguing for the researchers, said they only used automated search tools to analyze posts that were publicly available on the site, and that X's lawsuit is a poorly thought out effort to silence its critics.
鈥淕iven the nature of what happened here, the use of a search function to look at tweets, I think that鈥檚 a hard case to make,鈥 Quinn said.
The center is a nonprofit with offices in the U.S. and United Kingdom. It regularly publishes reports on , extremism or harmful behavior on social media platforms like X, or Facebook.
The organization has published , detailing an increase in as well as since his purchase.
The center is not the only group that has pointed to the rise of hateful material on X since Musk鈥檚 purchase in October 2022. Last November, and its parent company Comcast, said that they stopped advertising on X after a report from the liberal advocacy group Media Matters said their ads were appearing alongside material praising Nazis. It was yet another setback as X tries to win back big brands and their ad dollars, X鈥檚 main source of revenue. X has also .
Later that month, Musk went on an in response to advertisers that halted spending on X in response to antisemitic and other hateful material, saying they are are engaging in 鈥渂lackmail鈥 and, using a profanity, essentially told them to go away.
Thursday's hearing was called after the center filed a motion to dismiss X's lawsuit. Breyer said he will take the motion under consideration.
Musk is a self-professed free speech absolutist who has welcomed back and to the platform, which he last year. He initially had promised that he would allow any speech on his platform that wasn鈥檛 illegal. 鈥淚 hope that even my worst critics remain on Twitter, because that is what free speech means,鈥 .
Nevertheless, the billionaire has at times proven sensitive about critical speech directed at him or his companies. Two years ago he who covered his takeover of Twitter.
