“`html
Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images
- X, previously known as Twitter, is modifying its blocking feature.
- Users who have been blocked will soon be able to view the posts of the person who blocked them.
- This change may force abuse victims to choose between their safety and freedom of expression on X, according to advocates.
Overview of Changes to X’s Blocking Feature
X, which was formerly Twitter, has recently announced a transformation in how its blocking function operates. Currently, when a user blocks another account, that blocked account cannot see any posts from the user who initiated the block. However, this week X indicated that this policy will soon be altered—though no specific timeline was provided for these changes.
The revised blocking mechanism will permit users who have been blocked to access the public posts of those who blocked them. While they won’t be able to interact with these posts directly, they can still view them if the blocker’s account is set to public.
Concerns Raised by Advocates and Users
The engineering team at X stated in a recent announcement: “Currently, users utilize the block feature as a means of sharing or concealing harmful or sensitive information about those they’ve restricted. This update aims for increased transparency by allowing visibility into such behaviors.”
However, critics argue that this modification could compromise safety for certain individuals—particularly those facing domestic violence or harassment. When approached for comments regarding these concerns by Business Insider (BI), X did not provide additional insights but instead referred back to their engineering team’s post.
“This is a significant day for stalkers and harassers,” remarked one user in response to the news—a sentiment echoed by many others online; one post garnered over 89,000 likes. Another user expressed frustration: “That’s not blocking; it’s enabling stalking.” A third individual questioned how they could effectively block someone if their security depended on it due to stalking issues.
The Impact on Victims’ Safety and Well-being
Adam Dodge, founder of End Tech-Enabled Abuse, shared his perspective with BI: “Any measure that grants an abusive person power over their victim must be scrutinized carefully. The knowledge that an individual intent on causing harm can monitor social media activity places victims in precarious situations.” He further noted that such changes might lead victims into heightened states of vigilance—an experience detrimental both emotionally and physically.
Dodge anticipates some backlash against victims expressing concern over this change; he believes suggestions like making accounts private unfairly shift blame onto those affected rather than addressing systemic issues within platform policies.
User Options Moving Forward
In light of these updates regarding privacy controls on X’s platform, users seeking more stringent measures are directed towards resources explaining how they can adjust their accounts’ visibility settings accordingly. Dodge emphasized that individuals should retain autonomy over whether their accounts remain public while also having robust options available for blocking abusive users—a necessity especially relevant for professionals requiring public profiles.
A Call for Consideration Regarding User Safety
“This situation forces victims into an untenable position where they must choose between personal safety and exercising free speech online,” he concluded emphatically. There are existing loopholes within current blocking systems; notably a blocked individual could easily create another account just to access content from someone who has restricted them previously.
“While it’s true no social media platform’s current approach is flawless,” said Dominic Sellitto—a clinical assistant professor specializing in management science at University at Buffalo School of Management—“these systems typically offer some level of protection against toxic interactions.” He added creating new accounts requires effort which may deter persistent harassers from continuing unwanted engagement with targeted individuals.
Sellitto acknowledged consumers do possess agency concerning privacy choices but recognized challenges arise when professional obligations tie individuals closely with specific platforms.
Source
“`
