Twitter Suspends Kathy Griffin After She Changed Her Handle to ‘Elon Musk’

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/twitter-suspends-kathy-griffin-she-005014345.html

by mfiguiere • 4 years ago

71 136 4 years ago

Oh boy he real mad now. Amazing that simply changing a name and picture is considered impersonation.

CleverLime• 4 years ago

It was annoying, anyone, especially verified could change picture and name to someone else and write some bullshit. Most of people wouldn't notice the handle, only the name and picture, and that's how fake news might spread. Lately there were a lot of verified profiles that changed their profile pic and name to Elon Musk and were trolling.

thisiswater2• 4 years ago

Surely context would show that these are parodies, not impersonations.

Are these people trying to impersonate Elon Musk, or are they parodying Elon Musk on their clearly-marked "not elon musk" (due to the handle) accounts?

I'm inclined towards the latter.

insanitybit• 4 years ago

This has always been the case and it has always been fine.

silisili3• 4 years ago

Um, yeah... because those are prominent. The ID is smaller.

Don't be verified and pretend to be someone else. Or just don't pretend to be someone else regardless. Seems pretty straightforward...

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

Wait till you learn about parody. Saturday Night Live is going to be a real mind blower for you.

theonething7• 4 years ago

Amazing that simply changing a name and picture is considered impersonation.

This was Twitter's policy long before Musk got involved.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220108193314/https://help.twit...

bilekas• 4 years ago

Wasn't this the point of the blue checkmark originally?

seanhunter3• 4 years ago

Yes. It’s almost like it wasn’t “bullshit”[1] but served a useful purpose and that the policy of believing that all speech that doesn’t break the law should be protected wasn’t fully thought through.

[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1587498907336118274

KerrAvon4• 4 years ago

The problem is that it was always at the whim of some opaque internal Twitter process. There always should have been an actual process for anyone to be verified. It creates resentment when the criteria for verification are not transparent.

Is this going to fix it? No, one of two things will happen: (1) Musk will end up with a gigantic tax write-off when he sells what’s left of Twitter to Verizon for 140M two years from now. (2) Musk will turn it into something that is successful by some definition but isn’t Twitter and no longer commands the same attention from the world at large.

JohnTHaller• 4 years ago

It was. Now it's just an $8 a month symbol. The folks changing their name to Elon Musk were pointing out the stupidity of this change.

r7213• 4 years ago

Her profile on Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@kathygriffin (14k followers for now).

recuter7• 4 years ago

Well how do you know on Mastodon?

I think the actual account is: https://mstdn.social/@stunning_and_brave

r7213• 4 years ago

I found proper account name in Google cache of her Twitter profile (in bio):

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IVCAOs... (archived: https://archive.is/MdSyK)

recuter7• 4 years ago

Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying “parody” will be permanently suspended
My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk

So Babylon Bee and The Onion is secure as long as they don't pretend to be actual news like the rest of the media. Excellent. :)

KerrAvon4• 4 years ago

You know, he was not willing to pay the kid running that account more than $5000 to take it down, so he can spare us the personal safety risk whining and just take commercial first class like us single-digit millionaires if he’s so concerned about it.

recuter7• 4 years ago

You know, that would open him up to blackmail and doesn't solve the problem.

olliej• 4 years ago

I'm recalling a week ago when he said comedy was allowed on twitter again, and also the claims that they would not be censoring people.

jurassic• 4 years ago

So his commitment to free speech absolutism has lasted an entire week! That's honestly longer than I expected. He's gonna need thicker skin if he's going to be extremely online all the time during this rebuild of the company.

imron• 4 years ago

I'm recalling a week ago when he said verified accounts that impersonated others would be suspended.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1587853006699401216#m

Dylan168072• 4 years ago

When the phrasing is "spam/scam/impersonation", I'd say it doesn't cover this.

thisiswater2• 4 years ago

I would argue that these accounts are parodying, not impersonating.

ddalex• 4 years ago

"Free speech is what I allow it to be" - Elon Musk, probably

rvz• 4 years ago

If verified accounts violate terms of service, eg spam/scam/impersonation, they’ll be suspended, but Twitter will keep their money!

Yup, they were warned and they done it anyway and now they are crying over that suspension. So this over-reaction isn't newsworthy.

Rebelgecko• 4 years ago

He also said that it wouldn't be impersonation if it had a disclaimer that it was a parody account, and then he banned accounts like H3H3's that were clearly labeled as parodies.

davesque• 4 years ago

Yeah, who could have seen this coming? Will be interesting to see what other innocuous behavior ends up suddenly qualifying as a violation under this regime.

randomdata5• 4 years ago

The banning is somewhat humorous, so i suppose he’s not completely wrong.

mjr002• 4 years ago

The obvious question is, "Why are verified profiles allowed to change their account display name in the first place?" Which seems to be getting addressed[0].

[0] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589401231545741312

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

Why wouldn't they be? Twitter culture is frequently about changing names. Many people just changed their display names to "spooky" Halloween versions.

The handle is the id, not the display names.

Plus, Twitter could easy make the check mark link out to a profile page explaining who the person is.

moomin• 4 years ago

Consider this: how is changing your profile name _in the wake of removing verification_ not speech?

seanhunter3• 4 years ago

You know that Elon Musk (who has of course had a verified profile for some time) has changed his displayname in the past right?

To "Elona" https://www.newsweek.com/why-elon-musk-changed-his-name-elon...

To "Lord Edge" https://www.forbes.com/sites/petersuciu/2021/11/08/elon-musk...

...and probably some others.

mjr002• 4 years ago

Alright. That doesn't answer my question though -- why should anyone with a verified profile be allowed to change their name, which could mislead people of their identity, while maintaining their verification status?

DisjointedHunt• 4 years ago

Its sad that censorship decisions are treated differently in the US media based on political affiliation.

Throughout the pandemic, I witnessed people questioning the science behind lockdowns and government overreach being banned, censored, de-patformed from social media sites and the common response in the media being "start your own platform"

"The shoe on the other foot" is such a bad place to find ourselves as a society, it speaks to us being incapable of reconciling our differences for a common good.

Since the 2016 election, the US has gone batshit insane it feels like. It was crazy before, but its incredibly hard to have any sort of a conversation about touchy issues these days without an overwhelming negative, non-critical response in the form of downvotes, aggressive bucketing into political buckets, pariah treatment etc.

I hope, at least on HN, we're able to hold discussions on political topics without such tribalism.

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

I've had a mixed experience. I've had people call me a mass murderer and a fascist because I identify myself as a communist. (Not a Tankie, fuck tankies.)

But I've also had some great discussions here with people who listen, trade book recommendations, and at least try to learn before writing me off.

A lot more of the former these days, unfortunately.

HourglassFR• 4 years ago

To be fair, being considered a threat to national security and held as a pariah for having communist ideas is hardly a recent development in the US.

KerrAvon4• 4 years ago

There’s no point in discussing US politics. It’s not possible to do that anywhere US people are allowed to post, because people in the US have nearly literally lost their minds. All because a mentally ill real estate huckster was elected president, found the cracks in America’s foundation that conservatives spent 40 years widening (with, to be sure, much help from the liberals/centrists), and stuck TNT in them.

Buckle up; the next decade is going to make the 1960’s look pastoral.

Apocryphon4• 4 years ago

This isn't a case of partisanship from the critics. If one side claims to be on the side of anti-censorship, then engages in censorship once in power, that is a case of hypocrisy. It doesn't take tribalism to call that out.

Slaminerag• 4 years ago

Jeph Jacques of Questionable Content fame had his account suspended for the same thing. https://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=4911

yanderekko4• 4 years ago

My understanding is that this behavior already violated the rules, it's not like Elon made this up on the spot (although perhaps he changed the punishment.)

I believe when this happens to less-sympathetic parties we chalk this up to "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences", right? I mean, few people are actually going to defend a right to misrepresentation. Depending of the circumstances it could actually be libel/defamation, right?

atoav• 4 years ago

freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences

This is the point I am not sure Elon Musk would have agreed with you about before aquiring the platform.

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

If I print the words Elon musk on a sheet of paper and tape it to my chest and start making stupid comments, I'm generally considered ok.

These "impersonations" are flimsy paper masks of Elon's face with the eyes cut out so you can see through.

This whole enforcement change is nothing more than Elmer Fudd throwing a tantrum because he bought a website full to the brim of bugs bunnies.

yanderekko4• 4 years ago

These "impersonations" are flimsy paper masks of Elon's face with the eyes cut out so you can see through.

Debatable. If I go on a major Mastadon instance and impersonate an admin or a top celebrity there will I get banned? If I do, should I expect much sympathy if I accuse the relevant admins of throwing a tantrum? Can I go on a major Mastadon instance and pretend to be a politician up for re-election and start making claims in hopes of damaging their electoral prospects?

It just strikes me as implausible that the people who are accusing Musk of being thin-skinned here actually believe that this sort of impersonation is defensible behavior. I guess it's reminiscent of the people who pearl-clutch about political violence but also were okay with Griffith doing a photoshoot posing with Trump's bloody decapitated head.

slg2• 4 years ago

Yes, this behavior was already against the rules. What Griffin is doing is a form of civil disobedience by intentionally breaking the rules to call attention to them. Previously this was a rule that was rarely broken because verification was hard to get and usually reserved for people who had a material interest in keeping it. That gave a strong incentive not to pull these hijinks. Next week verification will be as easy as spending $8. There are going to be a huge wave of accounts that think whatever they can get out of impersonating someone is worth more than the chance of losing their $8 investment.

exodust4• 4 years ago

Sounds like a good way to get rid of low quality accounts. It doesn't get much more pathetic than paying $8 for the chance to troll and knock furniture over as you exit Twitter in a huff.

nullstyle• 4 years ago

It's good to know free speech is secure :rolleyes:

groutlick• 4 years ago

I look forward to seeing Musk continue to run Twitter into the ground, and have to eventually forfeit Tesla and SpaceX because of this. They'll be better off without him at the helm.

recuter7• 4 years ago

I believe it was Edward R. Murrow who said as goes Kathy Griffin so does the rest of the civilized world.

techdragon• 4 years ago

Tesla might, they seem to have reached critical mass... but I don't know how far SpaceX will get given he made driving down $/kg to orbit a personal mission in order for his entire Mars stuff to be even remotely feasible as an endeavour (to speak nothing of how likely it is to succeed)

Without someone to say "Falcon 9 isn't good enough" when its already crushing the launch industry and all the competition is racing to catch up to its capabilities, which could take as much as a decade for slower moving companies like ULA (partial reuse goal is years away) or ArianeSpace, and regardless of the timeline often requiring significant efforts to develop reusability technologies that fit existing designs, whole new rocket design programs to add reusability, or fleeing to niches where such reuse is not viable (rapid schedule (in terms of calendar days between purchase and launch day) in the hope of holding onto some market share...

SpaceX without Elon would quite possibly turn into Blue Origin, who's glacial schedule is moving so slowly, the largest customer they have signed is for their engines, and due to widespread rumours those engines wont happen on time, the customer made a very big deal about showing off that they do indeed finally have some engines they can use to build their first test rocket.

Regardless of his many faults, personal and professional, he as CEO of a privately held company who gets to make the big decisions about what does and does not get built, has been responsible for pushing forward the space rocket business in a way that hasn't been seen in nearly half a century... The Apollo era saw companies push designs and innovate and resulted in actual test hardware programs with such experiments as Aerojet's 260, a 6.6m diameter solid rocket motor with 16 MN of thrust, equivalent to the entire Saturn 1 first stage. The funding cuts post Apollo shrunk the industry into just relying on the R&D from the Military Industrial Complex side of the aerospace companies and so we got decades of slow incremental progress mainly off the back of maintaining the fleets of ICBMs.

maxbond2• 4 years ago

I'm curious to hear if anyone has recently changed their opinion on Elon Musk, in any direction, and why?

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

I suspected he was pretty shitty and petty. I no longer suspect, I'd say he's absolutely confirmed that now.

Whatarethese2• 4 years ago

I really like Tesla and SpaceX but I have really started to hate Elon over the past year. Just STFU and build quick cars and rockets. It can't be that hard but he thinks he's some kind of edge lord that thinks everyone loves him.

raxxorraxor• 4 years ago

I never had a particular opinion on him. I hate the glorification of people we quite frequently see in the US. In the same way vilifying him is the other side of the medal and just as stupid.

I think he is funny from time to time, but I believe he is an asshole as boss. Sometimes you have to be, but there are ways to go about that. There was a weird instance where he fired an allegedly incompetent engineer on the fly, but I don't know the details anymore. It seemed impulsive and random. Still, my opinion somehow improved lately. Maybe it is just his marketing team, but I prefer an asshole who is direct, instead of one that tries to hide it. Musk has enough self-reflection to know that he is an asshole. At least some points here...

nickthegreek• 4 years ago

At the beginning of covid, I wanted a tesla so bad. Now, I will never buy a tesla. Mind blowing to me that a company that sells something so pricey could alienate me so thoroughly, so quickly.

lamontcg5• 4 years ago

Nope, the useless cave diving coffin was when I realized that Musk was often stupid and well out of his depth. This is just the latest thing that he's stumbled into that he completely doesn't understand.

There's nothing more obnoxious than a p̶h̶y̶s̶i̶c̶i̶s̶t̶ rocket company CEO first encountering a new subject.

kcplate• 4 years ago

No change for me, I never really gave much opinion other than enjoying seeing the success of SpaceX.

I will say there is a definite pandemic of “Elon Musk derangement syndrome” going around now that I find entertaining as hell, as I watch normally sensible and smart people check their brain at the door as soon as his name is mentioned. That condition has prompted me to defend him a few times.

emptyparadise• 4 years ago

i thought comedy was legal now on twitter

akmarinov• 4 years ago

The bird was supposed to be freed

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

A few things:

Elon has no idea what he bought.

Elon cannot post, despite desperately wishing he could.

Elon has done the worst thing you can do if you are being trolled online ("mooom the Internet is being mean to me!"), which harkens back to #1.

He's rapidly pissing off the reason why many people are on Twitter in the first place.

All while laying people off and then sending them messages with, "wait, no, please come back".

...

It's like watching an any% Speedrun of "destroying one's own company".

akomtu• 4 years ago

What would the original Twitter management do differently? Wouldn't fire 50% of the staff over the next several months despite the recession? Kept the comedian's account active even if she impersonated Parag?

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

Probably both of those, yeah. Ad revenue was growing until Musk got involved.

at_a_remove• 4 years ago

I guess that last episode of "Fuck around and find out" didn't really take with Griffin.

Finding out that, apparently, there were under the table "You get a blue check for $15,000" schemes going on will make things ... super-interesting, if any forensics can find out a goodly percentage of the culprits. And I wonder exactly what overlap will be with this crop of sudden whiners.

DarthNebo• 4 years ago

Wonder if this is the 'rationale' with which they start demanding national IDs to ensure people with same names avoid getting flagged for impersonation. Also begs the question of since when was legal name ever a requirement for social media.

qull• 4 years ago

Wow, all these Hateful elon comments might be warranted, but are not what I though HN was about. Maybe this isnt the right forum to have actual discussions anymore.

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

There's plenty of room for discussions. Most people see Elon as a petulant villain right now. So when he's particularly petulant to the detriment of his platform and hypocritical, it's reasonable to call him out as such.

ihatepython2• 4 years ago

What exactly did you think HN was about? HN leans heavily to the left. I think it's best to just observe these types of topics, and only participate in the technical topics.

Apocryphon4• 4 years ago

Free speech is a civic liberties issue often embraced by libertarians such as Elon Musk.

socialismisok17• 4 years ago

As a leftist who regularly gets flagged, downvoted, or mixed votes for even suggesting a vaguely leftist idea I'd say:

Hacker news does not skew left. Not right. It's simply not a monoculture and it tends to emphasize data first and foremost. Anything even remotely politically charged will draw out all sorts of arguments.

bonchile• 4 years ago

HN leans heavily towards a pro-capitalist perspective, not left-wing viewpoints.

Which makes sense as it was founded by venture capitalists and is essentially used as a vehicle to promote their ideology.

pavlov• 4 years ago

This link points to yahoo.com which gives me a weird nostalgic twinge: “Remember when people used to care about what happens to this Yahoo! company and now it’s basically a random domain?”

Twitter seems to be on the same path to oblivion. Microsoft offered $44 billion for Yahoo in 2008, which in a strange coincidence is the same amount that Musk actually paid for his Yahoo/Waterloo.

drumhead• 4 years ago

I gather it was a leveraged buyout so he wont be losing much if it does go under. The only problem is most leveraged buyouts are for mature low or no growth companies that are profitable have strong cashflow and low capex requirements. Cant really say that about Twitter in any way. It feels like its going the way of Digg.

tomcam• 4 years ago

And now that sterling example of a human being, Ethan Klein of h3 productions:

https://twitter.com/mattwallace888/status/158950888646969753...

exodust4• 4 years ago

They should change their youtube channel next, to impersonate official google staff and services and see what happens. You know, for lolz and likes.

kweingar2• 4 years ago

It was previously a Twitter norm that you could temporarily change your display name to “impersonate” (satirize) someone, with your handle being the giveaway that it’s not real.

This norm seems to have been summarily overturned. I thought that Twitter was going to keep the status quo with moderation and make changes through a moderation council with diverse viewpoints.

benmmurphy• 4 years ago

I thought this was verboten for blue checks because it kind of defeats the purpose of verification. It says on the blue check page that parody accounts are not eligible for verification. Though, it does not say explicitly that parodying using an existing verified account will lead to suspension.

https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/about-twit...

theonething7• 4 years ago

It was previously a Twitter norm that you could temporarily change your display name to “impersonate” (satirize) someone, with your handle being the giveaway that it’s not real.

Here is the policy archived from January of this year.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220108193314/https://help.twit...

The account name (note: this is separate from the username, or @handle) should clearly indicate that the user is not affiliated with the subject of the account. Non-affiliation can be indicated by incorporating, for example, words such as (but not limited to) "parody," "fake," "fan," or "commentary.” Non-affiliation should be stated in a way that can be understood by the intended audience.

So the requirement goes beyond your handle, it must be clearly indicated in your display name that it is a parody. Kathy did not do that. She changed it to just "Elon Musk".

So Musk is enforcing a policy that existed way before this takeover.

kweingar2• 4 years ago

This rule was rarely (if ever) enforced when people would change their account name temporarily as a one-off joke.

Also from the page you linked:

When we receive a valid impersonation or trademark report about an account that is not in compliance with our Policy, we may give the account owner the opportunity to bring their account into compliance and we may temporarily suspend the account. Accounts with a history of repeated violations may be permanently suspended.

Musk’s decree is clearly a break from previous policy.

snvzz4• 4 years ago

There's nothing nice or funny about a "parody" of someone by impersonating them. It's an asshole thing to do, and very unpleasant to be a victim of.

Rules should just be changed to be completely clear about that. Impersonating equals ban.

sackbut• 4 years ago

It being an asshole thing to do to people in positions of power has been the reason for parody for literally thousands of years.

lamontcg5• 4 years ago

Free Speech Absolutists should firmly support people saying asshole things.

Unless only certain people are allowed to be assholes with their speech.

snvzz4• 4 years ago

Free Speech Absolutists should firmly support people saying asshole things.

Understandable, but without impersonation.

i.e. Don't put words into other's mouths.

ASalazarMX• 4 years ago

Also, no one is mentioning that this "comedian" impersonated Musk on her main account because it was verified, and without warning that it was a new parody account, urged people to vote democrat a day before the elections. She could have done the same before the acquisition, and likely be banned anyway.

I think she only wanted publicity. The timing and action is questionable, but now everyone knows her name.

snvzz4• 4 years ago

Attacking popular/successful people is indeed a classic, effective and scummy way to get visibility.

bitshiftfaced• 4 years ago

It appears to be part of their premuskian TOS: https://web.archive.org/web/20221003235153/https://help.twit...

incomingpain• 4 years ago

While under her normal name she made a number of comments supporting the democrats. Saying to vote democrat, etc. No problem.

When she switched her name and picture to Elon, she broke an existing rule about no impersonation.

In effect, when both of these combined she was publicly spreading election misinformation by making it look like Elon Musk was recommending to vote democrat. Also against the rules.

This is not the first time she has broken the twitter rules; she must be surprised they got enforced this time.

Twitter Suspends Kathy Griffin After She Changed Her Handle to ‘Elon Musk’

Related Stories