Musk Makes Bombshell Allegations By Claiming That The US Government Has ‘Complete Access’ To The Private Chats Of Twitter Users.
Does this indicate that Elon Musk or anybody else on Twitter can access users' direct messages? What safeguards are in place to protect users' privacy from prying staff who may be interested in what celebrities say in DMs or what an ex-partner says on the service?
The extent to which multiple government agencies have complete access to everything happening on Twitter will amaze you. According to an alarming new preview tape provided by Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk, who acquired Twitter in October 2022 for $44 billion, claims the US government has full access to everything on the social media network, including private direct messages (DMs) between users. And, while the tape will undoubtedly spark people’s interest in watching the whole interview with Musk, which is believed to be on Fox News right now, there are several follow-up questions that Carlson should have asked.
Musk’s remarks sparked instability on social media, with some users expressing shock and outrage. In contrast, others were unsurprised given the US government’s track record of spying and surveilling its citizens at home and friends and opponents overseas.
Musk also voiced alarm about the newest wave of artificial intelligence, or AI, warning Carlson that the technology could potentially destroy society. AI is more hazardous.
Musk’s comments come as he is embroiled in another fight with National Public Radio (NPR), an independent journalism organisation. Musk formally purchased the social media site in February. In response to Twitter adding a state-affiliated media designation to several media groups that get some public support, NPR said last week that it would deactivate its Twitter accounts and no longer publish on the social media network.
Following intense criticism of the decision, Twitter removed the state-affiliated branding and replaced it with government-funded. White House spokesman Karine Jean-Pierre claimed that NPR is an independent news organisation, adding, “If anyone follows their coverage, it is evident that they are certainly an independent news organisation.”
Assuming Musk’s description makes sense, we still don’t have answers to the most reasonable corresponding questions:
- Is Musk referring to government access gained by court order, as happens all the time when agencies like the FBI request access to data kept by tech companies?
- How did it work if the government’s access to private Twitter DMs is eviler than something obtained through a court order? Did the government monitor everyone’s messages all the time? What technique was employed for this monitoring?
- Does this indicate that Elon Musk or anybody else on Twitter can access users’ direct messages? What safeguards are in place to protect users’ privacy from prying staff who may be interested in what celebrities say in DMs or what an ex-partner says on the service?
- Is Musk planning to offer encryption for direct messages (DMs), as previously discussed but never implemented?
How much important is it to decode what Musk meant through his words?
These aren’t silly questions, especially with Musk involved. Two US senators recently demanded information from one of Musk’s other firms, Tesla, on maintaining customer privacy. According to reports, Tesla employees allegedly shared movies not intended to be seen outside of Tesla engineers due to allegedly rigorous guidelines.
The only method to figure out if these critical issues are answered is to listen to Tucker Carlson’s show. Everyone is curious to hear what else Musk says about how Twitter managed DM privacy and what it is doing today. However, if these straightforward questions are not addressed, it will waste everyone’s time.
Conclusion.
A few days back, the US was charged with spying on various countries across the world. Considering this statement regarding the privacy of Twitter DMs, it seems that the US government will leave no stone unturned to know what’s happening in the world, whether it is its neighbouring countries or its own citizens. And when asked the reason why the government is so much interested in knowing everything about everyone, it will state one simple reason by giving the excuse of ‘security’.
But is that OK to know someone’s DMs on the name of the country’s security? What Musk says can have any illogical meaning in the world, but if it comes true, will the US citizens be OK that they are dog watched by their governance?
