X Prevents Research on Potential Election Interference | Hacker News Reader

X Prevents Research on Potential Election Interference

freiheitsrechte.org

59 pointsdoener35 comments

Just last week a report about election interference by foreign entities on a Twitter was released.

Twitter does not seem very interested in transparency or stopping behavior favoring certain views

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGesRcirKQ/4-mOPKQEfWtozFtO_jU...

Just today, my think tank released a report also. Helps me to get tax payer funded grants

Could someone explain this to me - couldn't they just subscribe to Pro and use the API? What do they want that couldn't be achieved with that?

https://docs.x.com/x-api/getting-started/about-x-api

Is the problem that they don't want to pay?

> couldn't they just subscribe to Pro and use the API?

Since X serves German users, X needs to follow German law. Since German law says researchers need to be able to access data, the researchers tried to get the data. X says no (breaking the laws), so now they continue with the correct pipeline for getting the data anyways.

If this all sounds new and foreign to you, checkout the Digital Services Act (DSA) which seems to be the directive they're using for requesting the data.

Subscribing to Pro and using the API would be like admitting X didn't actually break laws here, so not surprising they try to go the right way about this. Not only for themselves, but would make it easier for others in the future when they win.

The law says that they're entitled the data for free? I honestly don't know, and the question is in good faith.

Just one snippet from the relevant regulation:

> This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms and very large online search engines to vetted researchers affiliated to a research organisation within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2019/790, which may include, for the purpose of this Regulation, civil society organisations that are conducting scientific research with the primary goal of supporting their public interest mission.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

There is a bunch of more mentions of "research" too if you have the free-time to go through it.

But in short; Yes, VLOPs (https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/dsa-vlops) need to provide data to researchers, for free.

Not entirely surprising. Musk doesn't want anyone looking into his businesses. Every public agency that DOGE has shut down so far had an active investigation into Musk or one of his businesses.

https://democrats-judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfiles/2025.02....

Is everything slightly critically of Musk now flagged on HN per default?

Users are flagging them whether they're positive or negative, critical or uncritical. The issue is not how favorable they are, it's how repetitive they are. Repetitive submissions on divisive topics—and who/what is more divisive right now—invariably turn into flamewars, so these flags are consistent with HN's intended purpose.

I've been posting a lot lately about how we (mods) handle this sort of situation. If you didn't see those, here are some starting points:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43051836

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978389

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42911011

If you (or anyone) take a look at those and the links they point to, and still have a question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to take a crack at it.

When its click bait, yes

Yes.

Didn't Elon offer to pay people to vote for trump last year? How is this not a crime? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crlnjzzk919o

I’ll take “What is a coup for $200 million” please.

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you that an oligarch in the middle of a coup attempt isn't interested in being transparent

Deleted because article has been flagged down.

> X Prevents Research on Potential Election Interference

Just because you assume it's about the US the headline is clickbait? Feels a bit strong. I agree it could have been more clear, but then I saw the domain and correctly understood the context without even opening the article.

> Second, they have no evidence of "potential election interference" -- this post is literally about them suing X to get the data to do the research which might back up such a claim.

That's true, but I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here? Is it the "potential election interference" that is problematic? There is a potential for election interference, no matter if they have evidence for it or not, I'm not sure how anyone can deny the potential. They don't make any strong claims regarding the election interference at all, and they're asking for data so they can see if it's accurate or not.

Because who cares about europe?

Europeans? Americans? Zimbabweans? Europe is a big place and has a significant impact on the world.

Why is it clickbait if Germany is not named in the title ? It's not like the title implies that it's in the US, that's just your brain.

Not clickbait at all.

Maybe this should have been the title?

"The platform refused to provide DRI with publicly accessible data, such as the reach or the number of likes and shares of posts. The Berlin Regional Court ruled that X must hand over the data. DRI aims to use this data to study the influence of social media platforms on the upcoming Bundestag election and to increase transparency regarding potential manipulations before the vote."

Because not doing what is legally required is called breaking the law, and Musk et all do not care about the law.

If its publicaly accessable data, then why don't they just take it? Would that require effort they would have to expend to further their own aims?

Sounds more like they want X to do the work for them.

They're entitled to access it en masse as per the law.

It's only click bait if you aren't in Germany and think any non-US election should be labelled as such in a headline.

The headline does use the words "research" and "potential" in it, because it is literally researching election interference that might come up in Germany.

Given the ... participation that X's owner has engaged in so far regarding German politics [1] [2] [3] it doesn't seem that outrageous.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2025/01/27/nx-s1-5276084/elon-musk-germa...

[2] https://www.npr.org/2024/12/31/nx-s1-5243166/germany-accuses...

[3] https://apnews.com/article/germany-scholz-elon-musk-far-righ...

From front page to flagged. Hey @dang, do you care to explain this?

Because its click bait

The fact that the German government won a lawsuit against X is clickbait? The same X that is headed by a guy who is vocal in his support of a politcal party in Germany?

How dare he?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com