[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
<\/a> is the latest notable tech company to land in trouble with the <\/a>. The <\/a>, the bloc\u2019s executive arm, has <\/a> of an investigation. It claims that X has violated the <\/a> in a number of ways.<\/p>\n The platform\u2019s approach to paid verification has come into the EU\u2019s crosshairs. Officials say that the practice \u201cdoes not correspond to industry practice and deceives users.\u201d It added that, since anyone can pay to get a blue checkmark, it\u2019s difficult for folks to determine the authenticity of accounts (a <\/a> can tell you which accounts are verified because of notability and which paid for a checkmark). The EU also said there\u2019s evidence of bad actors using checkmarks to hoodwink people.<\/p>\n X’s problems with verification stem back several years. But at least when it was known as Twitter, the blue check was a (<\/a>) reliable form of assurance that an account was the real deal. Paid checkmarks, and the increase in visibility that Premium users get, seems to have led to an increase in scams and spam \u2014 <\/a>.<\/p>\n Next up, the EU took issue with X\u2019s alleged lack of advertising transparency. It claimed the company doesn\u2019t have a reliable, searchable ad repository that enables researchers to look into \u201cemerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online.\u201d<\/p>\n In addition, the EU said X is violating the DSA by failing to give researchers sufficient access to public data. \u201cIn particular, X prohibits eligible researchers from independently accessing its public data, such as by scraping, as stated in its terms of service,\u201d the bloc argued in a statement. In the EU\u2019s view, researchers are either dissuaded from carrying out projects or forced to <\/a> to do so given the way that X has set up its application programming interfaces (APIs).<\/p>\n “Back in the day, Blue Checks used to mean trustworthy sources of information. Now with X, our preliminary view is that they deceive users and infringe the DSA,” Thierry Breton, the EU’s internal market commissioner, said in a statement. “We also consider that X\u2019s ads repository and conditions for data access by researchers are not in line with the DSA transparency requirements. X has now the right of defense \u2014 but if our view is confirmed we will impose fines and require significant changes.”<\/p>\n If X is found guilty, it will face fines of up to six percent of its global annual revenue \u2014 so we may get a sense of just how much money the now privately held company is making these days. The EU may also direct X to take steps to ensure compliance with the DSA and impose further periodic fines if the company does not do so.<\/p>\n The EU hasn’t been shy in taking tech companies to task under the DSA and its sibling legislation, the Digital Markets Act. <\/a> and <\/a> could both be on the hook for multibillion-dollar fines if preliminary findings of investigations hold up.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n