Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, is set to implement a significant change to its blocking feature, diverging from traditional practices observed on other social media platforms. Under the new policy, users who have been blocked will still be able to see the public posts of those who blocked them, although they will not be able to like, repost, or reply to these posts.
Musk expressed his thoughts on the change last year, stating, “Blocking public posts makes no sense. It needs to be deprecated in favor of a stronger form of mute.” His statement has drawn attention from various stakeholders within the social media landscape, including Jack Dorsey, a co-founder and former CEO of Twitter, who echoed Musk’s sentiment.
While Musk and Dorsey argue that this change addresses concerns about “block evasion,” critics contend that the proposed adjustments may undermine user safety. Tracy Chou, founder of the anti-harassment tool Block Party, raised her concerns on X, saying, “I’m sure someone from Twitter (Elon) is arguing that block evasions were always possible from other accounts, but the point is that friction matters! Making it easy for a creeper to creep is not a good thing!!”
Chou’s perspective resonates with many users, as evidenced by a noticeable shift in user activity. In the wake of this announcement, Bluesky, a Twitter alternative, has seen a surge of approximately 1.2 million new users in just two days. This surge propelled Bluesky to the No. 2 spot in the U.S. App Store’s Social Networking category, a significant leap from its previous rank of No. 181.
While this increase in users could indicate a temporary shift in user sentiment, the implications of X’s policy change are more consequential than mere aesthetics or branding, such as its name change from Twitter to X. The new policy seems to prioritize the experiences of those who are blocked, rather than the concerns of users who have opted to block others—often those facing harassment.
In a statement regarding the policy change, X’s engineering team noted, “Today, block can be used by users to share and hide harmful or private information about those they’ve blocked. Users will be able to see if such behavior occurs with this update, allowing for greater transparency.” However, this rationale has been met with skepticism by advocates for user safety.
Claire Waxman, the appointed Victims’ Commissioner for the London Mayor’s Office, voiced her concerns about the potential ramifications for victims of abuse. “This is a dangerous decision for a social media platform, and will have serious implications for victims—especially those being stalked—and their safety,” she stated on X. “Enabling blocked users to see posts is catering to abusers and stalkers, indulging and facilitating their behaviors.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Colten Meisner, an assistant professor at North Carolina State University who specializes in social media harassment, echoed these sentiments. He described the blocking feature as a crucial line of defense for those experiencing harassment, stating, “It feels like there’s no other way to interpret this policy change but to say, ‘Victims of harassment, the first line of defense you’ve had, we’re now going to take it away.’”
Meisner also observed a pattern in how Musk’s personal beliefs and grievances influence platform policies. “Elon is definitely the archetype of the person that’s being blocked, and so it almost feels like childish retaliation in some sense,” he explained. “He has a history of making policy changes based on his whims.”
This trend is evident in previous actions taken by X, such as suppressing links to competing platforms like Substack and Mastodon. The platform also faced criticism for labeling NPR as “state-affiliated media,” a designation typically reserved for outlets lacking editorial independence from their governments.
Amid rising concerns about hate speech on the platform, this alteration to the blocking feature may further exacerbate existing issues. “This policy change is just a massive backstep in the history of harassment,” Meisner added, underscoring the potential dangers of the new approach.
