Twitter expands definition of doxxing to include links to publicly available information.<\/strong> Twitter CEO Elon Musk has suspended the accounts of multiple tech journalists<\/a>. The suspended journalists include reporters for Mashable<\/em>, CNN, The New York Times<\/em>, and The Washington Post<\/em>. Musk also suspended the account of the decentralized social network Mastodon<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Musk’s move comes after he suspended an account (@ElonJet) that shared publicly available information about his flight plans. A few weeks ago, Musk made a big deal about not banning the account, tweeting “my commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane.” But like so many of Musk’s free speech principles, this one appears to have been short-lived.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Musk claimed the @ElonJet account violated Twitter’s policy against doxxing<\/a>\u2014revealing private information about another person. That’s a stretch, since Musk’s flight plans come from public records. But doxxing tends to get defined vaguely and broadly these days, and at least the @ElonJet account could plausibly fall somewhere within these parameters.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Mastodon was banned simply for linking to an account on its platform that tracked Musk’s jet. Now, “many links to Mastodon no longer work on Twitter, which flags them<\/a> as ‘potentially harmful,'” notes<\/a> TechCrunch<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Washington Post<\/em> journalist Drew Harwell then shared a screenshot of Mastodon’s tweet<\/a>; he was suspended. Pundit Keith Olbermann called on people<\/a> to retweet Harwell; Olbermann was then suspended, too. It’s unclear for how long any of these accounts will be suspended.<\/p>\n

It’s also unclear precisely what got each of the suspended journalists the boot, but Musk implied they were all guilty of violating Twitter’s anti-doxxing policy. “So far, i’ve been able to confirm about half the accounts suspended posted links to the jet tracker thing,” tweeted<\/a> Founders Fund Vice President Mike Solana, to which Musk responded: “<\/span>Same doxxing rules apply to ‘journalists’ as to everyone else.” <\/span><\/p>\n

The suspended tech reporters don’t seem to have actually doxxed Musk by any normal<\/em> understanding of the word. But earlier this week, Twitter’s doxxing policy was updated to make the @ElonJet account and people sharing links to Musk’s (public!) flight information elsewhere a direct violation. As recently as Tuesday, it said<\/a> that you couldn’t share “home address or physical location information, including street addresses, GPS coordinates or other identifying information related to locations that are considered private.” Now, it includes<\/a> “live location information, including information shared on Twitter directly or links to 3rd-party URL(s) of travel routes, actual physical location, or other identifying information that would reveal a person’s location, regardless if this information is publicly available.”\u00a0In other words: Twitter changed its doxxing policy precisely to target activity that seemed to bother Musk.<\/p>\n

Twitter is a private company, so it can certainly ban users\u2014including journalists\u2014for any or no reason. But Musk’s decision to do so is one more nail in the coffin of the “free speech absolutist” label he was posturing toward.<\/p>\n

It’s also yet more evidence that the new Twitter isn’t going to be better than the old Twitter, which was given to silly-seeming reasons for bans and sometimes stretching its terms and conditions to justify action against inflammatory or controversial accounts. Arguably, Musk’s Twitter is even worse, since these moves are not being made by misguided, low-level content moderators or a team of deliberating individuals but the whims of one thin-skinned dude who also happens to be the head of the company.<\/p>\n

Say what you will about Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s founder and former head, but he stayed relatively removed from day-to-day suspension and banning decisions, and was never known to take action against anyone for criticizing, mocking, or reporting badly on him.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Musk is establishing a pattern of lashing out against people who seem to anger or offend him personally\u2014and changing Twitter’s official policies in order to justify it. Last month, Musk suspended the accounts<\/a> of people who were parodying him after changing Twitter’s rules to say that parody must be clearly labeled as such in account handles.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Further showcasing a lack of principles, Musk ran<\/a> a Twitter poll yesterday asking when he should allow the suspended tech journalists to return to Twitter\u2014then balked at following through when people voted that they should be reinstated immediately. (“Sorry, too many options. Will redo poll,” Musk tweeted<\/a>.) <\/span>When Musk polled people about whether to let former President Donald Trump back on and the answer was yes, Musk respected the results and reinstated Trump’s account (tweeting<\/a> “Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” a.k.a. “the voice of the people is the voice of God”).<\/p>\n

It seems Musk’s “power to the people” mantra<\/a> only applies when the people agree with what Musk himself wants.<\/p>\n