Anger at former French PM over ‘financial domination’ comment many consider antisemitic

Dominique de Villepin faces a backlash after a TV interview in which he claimed American actors and other public figures were under pressure to avoid criticizing Israel. (YouTube/Screenshot)
Short Url
Updated 30 November 2023
Follow

Anger at former French PM over ‘financial domination’ comment many consider antisemitic

  • Dominique de Villepin faces a backlash after a TV interview in which he claimed American actors and other public figures were under pressure to avoid criticizing Israel
  • The head of an organization for French Jews describes comments as ‘insidiously antisemitic rhetoric’ that suggests Jews are ‘puppet masters of the media and artists’

LONDON: A former prime minister of France faced an angry backlash on Wednesday after comments that many people interpreted as a veiled, antisemitic criticism of Jewish control of the arts, culture and the media.

During a TV interview, Dominique de Villepin talked about the alleged pressure on American actors and other public figures to avoid criticizing Israel during the Gaza war.

“You can see in the background how substantial the domination of finance is on the realms of media, art and music,” he told TMC television. “They can’t say what they think simply because their contracts are immediately ended. Unfortunately, we see this as well in France.”

Some commentators described his comments as dangerous and reminiscent of bigoted beliefs in the 19th and early 20th centuries about Jewish power within French society.

These beliefs resulted in events such as the Dreyfus affair from 1894 to 1906, in which a Jewish military officer was wrongly convicted of treason, the rise of right-wing political parties with antisemitic views in the 1930s, and the French state’s deportation of 76,000 Jews to Nazi death camps during the Second World War.

“The antisemitism that was so long hidden is being unleashed,” said Jacques Attali, a prominent intellectual and former presidential adviser.

Yonathan Arfi, the head of Crif, an organization for French Jews, said: “Dominique de Villepin did not make a gaffe. He revealed himself in spite of himself.

“His words reveal insidiously antisemitic rhetoric which is aimed, without naming them, at Jews as the party of international finance and the puppet masters of the media and artists.”

Eric Ciotti, the leader of de Villepin’s former party, The Republicans, also criticized him and expressed shock about “conspiracy theory remarks that remind us of dark times” in French history.

While serving as foreign minister, de Villepin spearheaded France’s decision not to participate in the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

He has said that it is not antisemitic to criticize the suppression of free speech by the financially powerful, and that his criticism of the Israeli government and its policies, and the country’s assault on Gaza, is not the result of any form of hatred of or prejudice against the Jewish people.

French politicians and media figures on the extreme left of French politics have voiced support for de Villepin, saying that his comments about financial influence were misinterpreted, and that in other comments about the Middle East he was simply reflecting France’s long-standing impartial stance on Israel and Arab nations.

However, the controversy has brought renewed attention to long-running social issues in French society, where there has been a prevailing wave of antisemitism of late.

French police have recorded hundreds of antisemitic attacks in the past month alone. Studies have found that 75 percent of the Jewish population in France claimed to have personal experience of offensive treatment, and 50 percent admitted to concealing their Jewish identity in public.


Russian ‘disinformation’ campaign on US immigration woes find way into American voter platforms

Updated 02 March 2024
Follow

Russian ‘disinformation’ campaign on US immigration woes find way into American voter platforms

  • Disinformation is worse on X and TikTok, given their lack of controls, says Logically, a tech company that tracks disinformation campaigns
  • Russia and other disinformation spreaders also use encrypted messaging sites or websites that masquerade as legitimate news outlets

WASHINGTON: For Vladimir Putin, victory in Ukraine may run through Texas’ Rio Grande Valley.
In recent weeks, Russian state media and online accounts tied to the Kremlin have spread and amplified misleading and incendiary content about US immigration and border security. The campaign seems crafted to stoke outrage and polarization before the 2024 election for the White House, and experts who study Russian disinformation say Americans can expect more to come as Putin looks to weaken support for Ukraine and cut off a vital supply of aid.
In social media posts, online videos and stories on websites, these accounts misstate the impact of immigration, highlight stories about crimes committed by immigrants, and warn of dire consequences if the US doesn’t crack down at its border with Mexico. Many are misleading, filled with cherry-picked data or debunked rumors.
The pivot toward the United States comes after two years in which Russia’s vast disinformation apparatus was busy pushing propaganda and disinformation about its invasion of Ukraine. Experts who study how authoritarian states use the Internet to spread disinformation say eroding support for Ukraine remains Russia’s top priority — and that the Kremlin is just finding new ways to do it.
“Things have shifted, even in the last few days,” said Kyle Walter, head of research at Logically, a tech company that tracks disinformation campaigns. While experts and government officials have long warned of Russia’s intentions, Walter said the content spotted so far this year “is the first indication that I’ve seen that Russia is actually going to focus on US elections.”
This month Logically identified dozens of pro-Russian accounts posting about immigration in the US, with a particular interest in promoting recent anti-immigration rallies in Texas. A recent Logically assessment concluded that after two years spent largely dedicated to the war in Ukraine, Russia’s disinformation apparatus has “started 2024 with a focus on the US”
Many posts highlight crimes allegedly committed by recent immigrants or suggest migrants are a burden on local communities. Some claims were posted by accounts with tiny audiences; others were made by state media sites with millions of followers.
This week the accounts seized on the recent death of a Georgia nursing student and the arrest of a Venezuelan man who had entered the US illegally and was allowed to stay to pursue his immigration case. The killing quickly became a rallying cry for former President Donald Trump and other Republicans who suggest that migrants commit crimes more often than do US citizens. The evidence does not support those claims.
The content, crafted in English, has quickly found its way to websites and platforms popular with American voters. Footage of a recent anti-immigration protest broadcast by Russian outlet RT, for example, was racking up thousands of views this week on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, and prompting angry replies from other users.
The Russian outlet Sputnik ran a story this week about growing calls to build a US-Mexico border wall, a priority for Trump, who failed to complete the job as president. An analysis of other sites that later linked to the Sputnik piece shows more than half were in the US, according to data from the online analytics firm Semrush.com. Overall, Americans make up the English-language Sputnik’s largest audience.
US officials have warned that Russia could seek to meddle in the elections of dozens of countries in 2024, when more than 50 nations accounting for half of the world’s population are scheduled to hold national votes. While Russia has a strategic interest in the outcome of many of them — the European Parliament, for one — few offer the opportunity and the prize that America does.
For Russia’s bid to conquer Ukraine, this year’s US election stakes couldn’t be higher. President Joe Biden has pledged to fully back Ukraine. Republicans have been far less supportive. Trump has openly praised Putin and the former president has suggested he would encourage Russia to attack America’s NATO allies if they don’t pay their fair share for the military alliance.
More than half of Republicans believe the US is spending too much on Ukraine, according to a recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research that found Democrats to be much more supportive of additional aid.
Soon after the war started, Russia mounted a disinformation campaign designed to cut into support for Ukraine. Claims included wild stories about secret US germ warfare labs or Nazi conspiracies or that Ukrainian refugees were committing crimes and taking jobs from people who had welcomed them.
That effort continues, but Russia also has shifted its attention to issues with no obvious tie to Moscow that are more likely to create cracks in the unity of its adversaries — for example immigration, or inflation, high-profile topics in the US and Europe.
“They’re very savvy and understand the right buttons to push,” said Bret Schafer, senior fellow and head of the information manipulation team at the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a Washington-based nonprofit. “If your ultimate objective is to reduce support for Ukraine, your inroad might be talking about how bad things are on the southern border. Their path to win this thing is to get the US and the E.U. to stop sending weapons and aid to Ukraine.”
A message left with the Russian Embassy in Washington wasn’t immediately returned.
America’s election may also be a tempting target for other authoritarian nations such as China and Iran that, like Russia, have shown a willingness to use online propaganda and disinformation to further their objectives.
The online landscape has dramatically shifted since Russia sought to meddle in America’s 2016 presidential race won by Trump. Platforms such as Facebook and Instagram have banned many Russian state accounts and built new safeguards aimed at preventing anyone from exploiting their sites. In one recent example, Meta, the owner of Facebook, announced last fall that it had identified and stopped a network of thousands of fake accounts created in China in an apparent effort to fool American voters.
Other platforms, including X, have taken a different approach, rolling back or even eliminating content moderation and rules designed to stop disinformation. Then there is TikTok, whose ties to China and popularity with young people have set off alarms in several state capitals and Washington.
Artificial intelligence is another concern. The technology now makes it easier than ever to create audio or video that is lifelike enough to fool voters.
Social media is no longer the only battleground either. Increasingly, Russia and other disinformation spreaders use encrypted messaging sites or websites that masquerade as legitimate news outlets.
“A lot of their activity has moved off the major platforms to places where they can operate more freely,” said John Hultquist, chief analyst at Mandiant Intelligence, a cybersecurity firm monitoring Russian disinformation.
Walter, Logically’s research director, said he is most concerned about disinformation on X and TikTok this year, given their lack of controls and their popularity, especially with young voters. TikTok’s ties to China have raised national security concerns.
He said that while election years tend to highlight the dangers of disinformation, the most effective information operations are launched years in advance. America’s adversaries have spent a long time studying its politics, building online networks and cultivating domestic divisions.
Now comes the payoff.
“They don’t need to put a ton of effort into causing disinformation,” Walter said. “They’ve already laid the groundwork leading up to 2024.”


Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity

Updated 02 March 2024
Follow

Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity

Elon Musk is suing OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman over what he says is a betrayal of the ChatGPT maker’s founding aims of benefiting humanity rather than pursuing profits.
In a lawsuit filed at San Francisco Superior Court, billionaire Musk said that when he bankrolled OpenAI’s creation, he secured an agreement with Altman and Greg Brockman, the president, to keep the AI company as a nonprofit that would develop technology for the benefit of the public.
Under its founding agreement, OpenAI would also make its code open to the public instead of walling it off for any private company’s gains, the lawsuit says.
However, by embracing a close relationship with Microsoft, OpenAI and its top executives have set that pact “aflame” and are “perverting” the company’s mission, Musk alleges in the lawsuit.
OpenAI declined to comment on the lawsuit Friday.
“OpenAI, Inc. has been transformed into a closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft,” the lawsuit filed Thursday says. “Under its new Board, it is not just developing but is actually refining an AGI to maximize profits for Microsoft, rather than for the benefit of humanity.”

REUTERS illustration

AGI refers to artificial general intelligence, which are general purpose AI systems that can perform just as well as — or even better than — humans in a wide variety of tasks.
Musk is suing over breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair business practices. He also wants an injunction to prevent anyone, including Microsoft, from benefiting from OpenAI’s technology.
Those claims are unlikely to succeed in court but that might not be the point for Musk, who is getting his take and personal story on the record, said Anupam Chander, a law professor at Georgetown University.
“Partly there’s an assertion of Elon’s founding role in OpenAI and generative AI technology, in particularly his claim he named OpenAI and he hired the key scientist and that he was the primary funder of its early years,” Chander said. “In some sense it’s a lawsuit that tries to establish his own place in the history of generative AI.”
Musk was an early investor in OpenAI when it was founded in 2015 and co-chaired its board alongside Altman. In the lawsuit, he said he invested “tens of millions” of dollars in the nonprofit research laboratory.
Musk resigned from the board in early 2018 in a move that OpenAI said at the time would prevent conflicts of interest as the Tesla CEO was recruiting AI talent to build self-driving technology at the electric car maker. “This will eliminate a potential future conflict for Elon,” OpenAI said in a February 2018 blog post. Musk has since said he also had disagreements with the startup’s direction, but he continued to donate to the nonprofit.
Later that year, OpenAI filed papers to incorporate a for-profit arm and began shifting most of its workforce to that business, but retained a nonprofit board of directors that governed the company. Microsoft made its first $1 billion investment in the company in 2019 and the next year, signed an agreement that gave the software giant exclusive rights to its AI models. That license is supposed to expire once OpenAI has achieved artificial general intelligence, the company has said.

ChatGPT-maker OpenAI is looking to fuse its artificial intelligence systems into the bodies of humanoid robots as part of a new deal with robotics startup Figure. (AP/File)

Its unveiling of ChatGPT in late 2022 bought worldwide fame to OpenAI and helped spark a race by tech companies to capitalize on the public’s fascination with the technology.
When the nonprofit board abruptly fired Altman as CEO late last year, for reasons that still haven’t been fully disclosed, it was Microsoft that helped drive the push that brought Altman back as CEO and led most of the old board to resign. Musk’s lawsuit alleged that those changes caused the checks and balances protecting the nonprofit mission to “collapse overnight.”
One of Musk’s claims is that the directors of the nonprofit have failed to uphold their obligations to follow its mission, but Dana Brakman Reiser, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, is skeptical that Musk had standing to bring that claim.
“It would be very worrisome if every person who cared about or donated to a charity could suddenly sue their directors and officers to say, ‘You’re not doing what I think is the right thing to run this nonprofit,’” she said. In general, only other directors or an attorney general, for example, could bring that type of suit, she said.
Even if Musk invested in the for-profit business, his complaint seems to be that the organization is making too much profit in contradiction to its mission, which includes making its technology publicly available.
“I care about nonprofits actually following the mission that they set out and not being captured for some kind for profit purpose. That is a real concern,” Brakman Reiser said. “Whether Elon Musk is the person to raise that claim, I’m less sure.”
Whatever the legal merits of the claims, a brewing courtroom fight between Musk and Altman could offer the public a peek into the internal debates and decision-making at OpenAI, though the company’s lawyers will likely fight to keep some of those documents confidential.
“The discovery will be epic,” posted venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya on Musk’s social media platform X on Friday. To which Musk replied in his only public commentary so far on the case: “Yes.”
 


Gaza conflict sends ripples through MENA soft power landscape

Updated 8 min 28 sec ago
Follow

Gaza conflict sends ripples through MENA soft power landscape

  • Saudi Arabia rose to 18th place in this year’s Brand Finance ranking, while Israel’s perception declined, possibly due to the ongoing conflict
  • This year’s survey encompassed all UN member states, assessing nations’ presence, reputation, and global impact

LONDON: The latest findings from Brand Finance’s Global Soft Power Index, one of the world’s leading brand evaluation consultancies, unveiled key shifts in the global soft power landscape, reflecting the intricate dynamics of the regional context.

While Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar have solidified their positions, attention has turned to Israel’s ranking decline and the repercussions of the Gaza conflict.

Israel experienced a noticeable decline in its soft power standing, a trend exacerbated by the recent conflict in Gaza.

“As the Anholt Nation Brands Index has shown since 2005, public opinion does not tolerate conflict,” Simon Anholt, policy advisor, author and one of the world’s leading authorities on national image, told Arab News.

“Conflict harms the images of all parties involved, whether perceived as aggressor or victim, and the effect lingers. Current events in Gaza will likely harm the images of both Israel and Palestine for years to come (even though Palestine does not feature in the index), reducing their ability to attract trade, talent, tourists and investment.”

However, Brand Finance CEO David Haigh highlighted that the full impact of the war on Israel’s performance in this year’s index remains unclear.

“Overall, Israel has dropped fairly obviously, but (since the completion of the survey), things have become a lot worse not only in what Israel is doing, but also the reaction globally,” Haigh told Arab News, suggesting that the true impact may be seen in next year’s report.

He emphasized a shift in global sentiment against Israel, both in the short and long term, requiring “substantial” and “real” changes for image improvement.

“If you don’t do that, whatever you’re doing is just propaganda,” he added.

The survey, which offers “a comprehensive evaluation of nations’ presence, reputation, and global impact” deriving from a range of metrics, was conducted between mid-September and early November, showing a split in results before and after the war.

These metrics encompass familiarity, influence, reputation, and perception. Perception is based on eight pillars: business and trade, governance, international relations, culture and heritage, media and communication, education and science, people and values, and sustainable future. 

Soft power, a concept coined by political scientist Joseph Nye in the 1990s, denotes a nation’s ability to achieve desired outcomes through persuasion rather than coercion or financial incentives. It emphasizes appealing to countries instead of coercing them, in contrast to the traditional reliance on military and economic power.

According to the latest edition of the report, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have surged ahead in the rankings of the most influential soft power nations, outpacing other countries worldwide.

“Nations such as the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have not only ascended in the ranks of global perception but are weaving the fabric of their generous hospitality, innovative achievements, and peace-building initiatives into the tapestry of international diplomacy,” Haigh said, noting how this continued investment could signal the “dawn of a new era, where dialogue and collaboration are the cornerstones of the global order.”

Benefiting from robust oil demand and substantial investments in sports and tourism, the Kingdom achieved a score of 56 out of 100 index points, marking a 4.7-point increase from the previous year and surpassing Denmark.

Similarly, the UAE and Qatar have seen their scores rise due to their resilient economies and the successful hosting of high-profile events like Expo 2020 and COP28 in Dubai and the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.

The UAE also received a 10/10 score for “Strong and stable economy,” ranking first in that category, and scored highly for “Future growth potential” and “Generosity.”

Haigh said: “Saudi Arabia is very similar. Both have been investing heavily.” He emphasized how despite economic and political challenges, these factors have emerged as key drivers of both “Reputation” and “Influence.”

However, he pointed out that Gulf countries still have room for improvement in the aspect of “Familiarity,” an area where the entire region has historically lagged behind, and “Friendly people,” an aspect that the Brand Finance CEO attributes to high costs associated with visiting these countries and, thus, not being able to interact directly with their cultures.

“Although increasing numbers of people are going there on holidays, the exposure to the actual Emiratis (and Gulf populations at large) is quite low,” Haigh said, arguing that regular interactions are essential for people around the globe to understand “whether you’re friendly or not.”

The findings of the report published annually by Brand Finance were discussed by soft-power experts, researchers and government delegates at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre in London on Thursday.

This year’s survey involved 170,000 respondents worldwide and an expanded ranking covering all 193 UN member states.

On a global scale, the US and the UK lead as the most influential soft power nations, with China ranking third, surpassing Japan and Germany, which hold the fourth and fifth positions, respectively.

Speaking to Arab News, Courtney Fingar, FDI consultant, journalist, and commentator on international investment trends, also addressed the potential economic implications of the Gaza conflict spreading beyond current borders.

“The war spilling (over) and escalating beyond the current borders is not good news for anyone in the region, but (also) not for the world.”

Recognizing the improved resilience of Gulf markets due to diversification efforts, Fingar cautioned against volatility risks, highlighting investors’ prioritization of security, a trend corroborated by the report.

She observed that the challenge for Gulf economies lies in “translating that attention and that energy into tangible investments,” Fingar said.

Saudi Arabia, alongside other nations, has prioritized economic diversification as a cornerstone of its Vision 2030. Central to this vision is the Kingdom’s effort to attract investment across various sectors, notably sports and tourism.

Florian Kaefer, founder and editor of The Place Brand Observer, a platform focusing on country brand reputation, emphasized Saudi Arabia’s significant strides in rebranding itself as a sustainable tourist destination.

Citing projects like Red Sea Global and AlUla, Kaefer highlighted the Kingdom’s shift toward a narrative imbued with purpose.

“Tourism, if it’s done well, like in terms of regenerative development — an approach that focuses on supporting local communities and creating positive relationships that will benefit society and the environment — has the potential to emphasize the power of a country,” he remarked.

Kaefer pointed out the transformative impact of high-profile events like the World Expo, to be hosted by Riyadh in 2030, in reshaping perceptions and benefiting countries striving to establish themselves as hubs of sustainability and regeneration.

“The image of Dubai has changed over the last 10 years quite a bit. I think Saudi Arabia is going to follow that path, which is smart regenerative development, sustainability,” Kaefer noted, underscoring the importance for the Kingdom to “stay true” to its promises of regeneration and sustainability, as this will enhance its reception and popularity both globally and domestically.

Apart from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel, this year’s Global Soft Power Index also involved 14 other Middle East and North African nations.

Kuwait, Egypt, and Oman secured ranks 37, 39, and 49, respectively, followed closely by Morocco at 50, Bahrain at 51, and Iran at 62. Jordan, Algeria, Tunisia, and Lebanon followed suit, securing ranks 63, 73, 77, and 91, respectively.

Iraq made a notable return to the top 100, securing the 99th position, while new entries like Syria (129th), Libya (139th), and Yemen (149th) also made their debut in the index.


Media watchdog urges protection of Israeli journalist facing death threats after pro-Palestine speech

Updated 01 March 2024
Follow

Media watchdog urges protection of Israeli journalist facing death threats after pro-Palestine speech

  • Yuval Abraham voiced concerns about Gaza situation during award acceptance speech at Berlin Film Festival
  • CPJ coordinator highlights ‘atmosphere of self-censorship and anti-press rhetoric in Israel’ 

LONDON: The Committee to Protect Journalists, a media watchdog, has called on Israeli authorities to ensure the safety of Yuval Abraham and his family, who have been the target of death threats following his speech expressing solidarity with Palestine.

Abraham, an Israeli journalist for +972 magazine and filmmaker, faced criticism from both Israeli and German officials after delivering a speech at the Berlin Film Festival in which he voiced concerns about the situation in Gaza.

CPJ Middle East and North Africa Program Coordinator Sherif Mansour said that he was “deeply alarmed” by the death threats directed at Abraham, and warned of a growing “atmosphere of self-censorship and anti-press rhetoric in Israel, which has been expanding since the Israel-Gaza war.”

He added: “Israeli authorities must ensure the necessary protection for all journalists, regardless of their views, and hold accountable those who threaten journalists and their family members.”

Abraham revealed that he had to cancel his flight back to Israel out of fear of being targeted. His family reportedly fled their home at night after a right-wing Israeli group arrived, searching for the journalist and issuing threats.

In his speech, Abraham accused the Israeli government of perpetrating a “massacre,” and called for an end to the double standards between Israeli and Palestinian citizens.

Standing alongside his Palestinian co-director, Basel Adra, Abraham highlighted the disparities in rights and freedoms between Israelis and Palestinians living in close proximity.

“This situation of apartheid between us, this inequality, has to end. We need to call for a ceasefire,” Abraham said.

Abraham, who is based mainly in Jerusalem, also criticized German arms sales to Israel.

The speech was labeled as “antisemitic” by several high-ranking German and Israeli officials, including the mayor of Berlin and Israel’s ambassador to Germany.

Abraham and Adra accepted two awards on Feb. 25 for their documentary “No Other Land,” which chronicles Israeli authorities’ evictions and demolitions of Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank.

Israeli public broadcaster Kan News initially labeled Abraham’s speech as “antisemitic,” a designation that was retracted only following Abraham’s request to the network.

Abraham joins a growing list of Israeli journalists facing physical assault and death threats since the beginning of the conflict last October.

Itamar Cohen, a journalist with Israel-based outlet News 360, faced hostility when Israeli police forcibly removed him from the scene of a stabbing in Jerusalem’s Old City, despite his identification as a journalist.

In October, journalist and columnist Israel Frey went into hiding after his home was attacked by a far-right Israeli mob. The attack took place after Frey expressed solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza.


US judge signals Elon Musk’s X may lose case against hate speech watchdog

Updated 01 March 2024
Follow

US judge signals Elon Musk’s X may lose case against hate speech watchdog

  • X sued the Center for Countering Digital Hate last July, accusing the nonprofit of breaching its user contract by cherry-picking data to create false and misleading reports that Musk was letting X become a haven for hate speech, extremism and other misinf

A US judge on Thursday signaled he may dismiss X Corp’s lawsuit against a nonprofit group that has criticized a rise in hate speech on the social media platform once known as Twitter since Elon Musk took it over.

X sued the Center for Countering Digital Hate last July, accusing it of causing tens of millions of dollars in damages through a “scare campaign” to drive away advertisers.
According to X, the nonprofit breached its user contract by improperly scraping and cherry-picking data to create false and misleading reports that Musk was letting X become a haven for hate speech, extremism and other misinformation.
US District Judge Charles Breyer was skeptical that when the nonprofit entered the standard user contract governing all Twitter and X users, it could have foreseen that Musk would buy Twitter for $44 billion in 2022 and welcome back users it had banned for posting hateful content.
“You’re telling me ... it was foreseeable that Twitter would change its policy and allow these people to have access,” the San Francisco-based judge told X’s lawyer Jon Hawk in a video conference.
“I am trying to figure out, in my mind, how that’s possibly true, because I don’t think it is.”
Hawk said the nonprofit could have left X if it didn’t like Musk’s changes. “When CCDH agreed to stay on the platform, it agreed to successors’ versions of the policy,” he said.
Musk, the world’s second-richest person, also runs the electric vehicle maker Tesla, which has faced several lawsuits claiming it tolerated the harassment of workers. Tesla has denied those allegations.

Free speech interference
John Quinn, a lawyer for the Center for Countering Digital Hate, said X’s lawsuit violated California’s so-called anti-SLAPP law, or strategic lawsuits against public participation, which was meant to stop lawsuits intended to silence critics.
He also called it “implausible” to suggest the nonprofit engaged in scraping, and said it could not be liable for advertisers’ “independent” decisions not to work with X.
“CCDH used a tool that runs searches for certain people to see what public tweets are being put out, and then they commented on it,” Quinn said. ” didn’t have any issues with that until advertisers reacted to the content of the report.”
Quinn also said giving Musk and X “the power to say, anybody who uses our search function and looks at tweets, if you use an automated tool in any way, we can come after you, sue you, drag you into court ... runs straight into speech principles.”
Hawk said that wasn’t why X sued.
“I understand CCDH does not like some of the content it may see,” he said. “This is about the security of data.”
Breyer did not say when he would rule, or if X could file an amended complaint if he dismissed the case.

European nonprofit
X also sued the European Climate Foundation, a nonprofit based in The Hague, Netherlands that promotes efforts to mitigate climate change, accusing it of conspiring with the Center for Countering Digital Hate to illegally gather data.
A lawyer for the European nonprofit said it should be dismissed from the case because the court lacked jurisdiction.
Since buying Twitter, Musk has since faced wide criticism that he fired too many people who policed misinformation, and from civil rights groups for allowing more harmful and abusive posts.
In November 2023, Musk endorsed an antisemitic post on X that said members of the Jewish community were stoking hatred against white people, saying the user spoke “the actual truth.”
He has denied being antisemitic and sought to make amends for his post. In January he visited former Nazi death camp Auschwitz in southern Poland.
The case is X Corp. v. Center for Countering Digital Hate Inc. et al, US District Court, Northern District of California, No. 23-03836.