Blocked users can now view posts but are restricted in other ways from interacting.
X, formerly known as Twitter, is making critical changes to the block feature amid criticism that people can now view content from accounts that had earlier restricted them.
“If your posts are set to public, accounts you have blocked can see your posts,” stated a
Nov. 3 update on the social media platform’s
Help Center. “However, they cannot engage (like, reply, repost, etc.) with your posts.”
Moreover, accounts cannot follow a blocked user and vice versa. Blocked users cannot send direct messages and add the accounts blocking them to their lists. They also cannot tag the persons blocking them. Blocking an account automatically unfollows it.
If users want to restrict blocked accounts from seeing their posts, they would have to set it to “
protected,” whereas public posts can now be seen by everyone.
Users of blocked accounts can see their accounts are blocked if they visit their specific accounts. They will be told they are blocked when they attempt to interact with the post. This is different from X’s mute feature.
“
Mute is a feature that allows you to remove an account’s posts from your timeline without unfollowing or blocking that account,” X states. “Muted accounts will not know that you’ve muted them and you can unmute them at any time.”
Unlike blocked accounts, users will be notified when their accounts are mentioned on the platform. In the case of individuals who have blocked other users, the former’s mentioning will not trigger any notification for the blocked users.
X had
hinted at the change last month. The platform’s engineering team said: “Block can be used by users to share and hide harmful or private information about those they’ve blocked. Users will be able to see if such behavior occurs with this update, allowing for greater transparency.”
Criticisms, Privacy Issues
Many users have expressed their displeasure about the latest update.
“If someone is blocked, they shouldn’t be able to see your profile at all,” said political commentator and analyst
Matt Couch. “Makes ZERO sense. I have received THOUSANDS of death threats over the years.. many reported to law enforcement.. I can’t imagine what some of the females on this platform think about this.”
Archaeologist
Flint Dibble asked for “a function to limit replies to only followers.”
“That way we can prevent accounts we’ve blocked from replying with harassment to those who reply to our posts, since blocked accounts can’t follow us,” he said.
When X first hinted at the change, FOX News sports writer
Ralph Vacchiano said, “A shortsighted, dumb and unwanted change. Exactly we expect from @X nowadays. If I block someone, I want them blocked. I blocked them for a reason. Usually it’s for violating your rules, which you constantly fail to enforce. You are needlessly rewarding them.”
X user
Maria replied to Vacchianao’s post, saying: “Your content is public and visible with or without an X account so they can see it whether you like it or not. Blocking them only stops interactions with your account and that doesn’t change.”
X’s new policy on its block feature is one of the latest measures implemented by the company that has triggered privacy concerns among users.
The platform’s new
terms of service are scheduled to come into effect on Nov. 15, which contain a clause that the company has the right to utilize user content in the training of its “machine learning and artificial intelligence models.”
This has raised concerns about content copyrights. The new terms “explicitly lets Twitter use your posts and any attached media—including images, videos, and their audio—for the training of AI models like Grok,” investigative reporter Ryan Fae
said in an Oct. 17 X post.
“This appears illegal in the European Union under the AI Act. However, such laws don’t exist in many jurisdictions, including the United States,” Fae said.
Last year, the platform introduced a new privacy policy allowing it to access the biometric data of users.
Even though the company
claims that such data will only be collected through user consent, “there is a real risk that their right to privacy will be violated,” Michael Kleinman, the director of Silicon Valley Initiative at Amnesty International,
said at the time.
