X Corp, the current owning entity of Twitter, has filed a lawsuit against a non-profit organization that fights against online hate following their critique of the social media platform.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), operating from the US and UK, is accused by X Corp of performing “unlawful acts” to obtain its data illegally.
In a retaliatory statement, CCDH pointed a finger at Elon Musk, owner of X Corp, accusing him of trying to suppress any criticisms against him. Musk, a self-proclaimed “free-speech absolutist”, has previously rebuffed such allegations.
Operating as a non-profit, CCDH conducts research and campaigns against digital hatred, its reports frequently making headlines in media outlets like the BBC. Among its UK board members is the Conservative MP Damian Collins.
Former minister Collins expressed shock at Musk’s move, likening it to a form of ‘lawfare’ where a powerful organization intimidates a lesser one.
In the US, Congress members Lori Trahan, Adam Schiff and Sean Casten wrote a letter to Musk, claiming that Musk’s lawsuit against CCDH inhibited impartial research for the public good.
CEO of CCDH, Imran Ahmed, likened Musk’s recent legal threat to authoritarian tactics, asserting that Musk would go to any lengths to silence his critics.
According to Ahmed, hate and misinformation have proliferated unchecked on the platform under Musk’s control. Ahmed referred to Musk’s lawsuit as an attempt to “shoot the messenger.”
Details of the lawsuit, filed on Monday, came to light following a fiery exchange of legal letters. The initial letter, warning of legal action, was from X Corp’s attorney, Alex Spiro, followed by a strong rebuttal from CCDH’s US lawyer, Roberta Kaplan.
Responding to the legal notice, Ian Russell, father of CCDH UK board member Molly Russell, labelled Musk’s legal action as an “unprecedented attack on civil society”.
Russell expressed astonishment at Musk’s aggressive strategy to quash free speech and stifle much-needed scrutiny at a time when Twitter seemed to be regressing in managing harmful content.
In previous statements, Musk alleged that hate speech had decreased by a third since his platform takeover.
New Allegations
While Spiro’s letter mentioned supposed inaccuracies in CCDH’s research (which CCDH refuted), the Monday lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, made fresh accusations.
The lawsuit demands unspecified damages from CCDH, stating that the adverse reports resulted in losses of “tens of millions of dollars” in advertising revenues for X Corp.
The suit also hints at potential amendments to include CCDH’s backers, possibly involving “foreign governments with ties to legacy media companies” once their identities are revealed.
CCDH has released several reports criticizing X, formerly known as Twitter. One such piece of information, subject to legal criticism by Spiro, claimed that Twitter failed to take action against 99% of hateful posts from Twitter Blue subscribers.
The lawsuit contests the methodologies and findings of CCDH’s research, accusing it of “intentionally and unlawfully” scraping data from X in violation of its terms of service.
Further allegations suggest that CCDH used the software tool Brandwatch to monitor brand-related social media conversations to gain “unauthorized” access to X’s data via a third party.
The lawsuit also purports that CCDH intended to suppress differing opinions on Covid-19 vaccines, reproductive healthcare, and climate change issues.
According to the lawsuit, CCDH’s reports caused several companies to halt their ongoing advertising expenditure on X.
As the legal battle unfolds, it raises significant questions about the balance of power between large corporations and advocacy groups and the extent to which social media platforms should be held accountable for content. Whatever the outcome, the case will likely have profound implications for free speech, the fight against online hate, and the future of data privacy in social media.
