Some legal experts agreed with @dril’s assessment and stated that giving celebrities blue checkmarks without their consent could indicate “sponsorship or approval.” As noted by the Verge, Northeastern University law professor Alexandra Roberts said the claim “sounds reasonable,” although she pointed out that various laws typically apply to false representation in advertising campaigns or commercial uses. In short, it’s not clear how a court would rule in a case like this.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, it’s not like Twitter or its CEO need any more problems. The company is still struggling to find new sources of revenue—it managed to sell only 28 Twitter Blue subscriptions immediately after Musk eliminated legacy verified checkmarks—and appears to be throwing all sorts of things at the wall to see what sticks, such as subscriptions to individual users and micropayments for individual news articles (eventually).

NPR Is Going Dark on Twitter | Future Tech
Subtitles
  • Off
  • English
NPR Is Going Dark on Twitter | Future Tech

Musk, meanwhile, is still fighting with media organizations on Twitter. On Tuesday, he threatened to give NPR’s Twitter handle, @NPR, to another company if it didn’t start tweeting again. NPR announced it was leaving Twitter on April 12 after a weeks-long battle with Musk over media labels which suggested the outlet was influenced by the U.S. government. The Twitter CEO suggested giving the outlet’s account to “National Pumpkin Radio,” which doesn’t exist.

Advertisement

At the end of the day though, this is Elon Musk we’re talking about, the same person who routinely ignores reasonable advice in favor of bad jokes or trolling. It’s hard to say whether he changed Twitter’s verified labels to protect his paid users, avoid a lawsuit, or simply because that’s the way the wind blew.