Under European Union law, X is one of a handful of major social media platforms that has a duty to facilitate public interest researchers’ access to support the study of systemic risks — such as to elections and other democratic processes. But the Elon Musk-owned company formerly known as Twitter has been blocking civil society access to platform data, according to two civil society organizations, which on Friday secured a summary judgement against X in a Berlin regional court.
Reuters reported that the German Society for Civil Rights (GFF) and Democracy Reporting International (DRI) secured a ruling from the court ordering X to immediately provide them with data so they can study public conversations and activity on its platform.
Federal elections are due to take place in Germany later this month — and in the run-up to the national poll, Musk has been using X to broadcast personal support for the far right AfD party, tweeting in December that “only the AfD can save Germany,” as well as hosting a livestreamed chat with its co-leader, Alice Weidel, last month.
In a press release detailing the action brought under the bloc’s Digital Services Act (DSA), the GFF accused X of preventing research into potential election interference.
“The platform refused to provide DRI with publicly accessible data, such as the reach or the number of likes and shares of posts. The Berlin Regional Court ruled that X must hand over the data,” it wrote. “DRI aims to use this data to study the influence of social media platforms on the upcoming Bundestag election and to increase transparency regarding potential manipulations before the vote.”
“Other platforms have granted us access to systematically track public debates on their platforms, but the company X has refused,” added Michael Meyer-Resende, executive director of DRI in a statement. “We see it as our right under the Digital Services Act to access data and strengthen the public good by showing how political campaigns evolve on social media platforms.”
X could not immediately be reached for comment.
The platform is already under investigation over suspected breaches of the DSA by the European Commission, which opened a wide-ranging probe in December 2023 — following on with a first set of “preliminary” grievances in July, including suspicions X has failed to facilitate access to data for researchers as the DSA obliges it to.
While the EU probe on X continues — and could ultimately result in fines of up to 6% of its global annual turnover, or even an order to block access to the platform in the regional — the law opens the company to wider legal risk via DSA litigation and court challenges, such as the one brought by the GFF and DRI.
The GFF said that as well as seeking to enforce the DSA provision requiring in-scope platforms to provide researchers with “immediate access to publicly available data” so they can investigate systemic risks, the lawsuit aims to clarify whether such cases can be brought to German courts or whether researchers need to go to Ireland — where X’s regional headquarters is established.
On the jurisdiction point it’s worth noting that separate DSA litigation brought against X last year via a court in the Netherlands prevailed in the summer, when a private citizen of the country used the regulation to successfully sue X over shadowbanning, as well as securing rulings against it under the bloc’s data protection framework, GDPR, and EU consumer protection law.
Separately on Friday, Reuters reported that Paris prosecutors have opened their own probe of X — over alleged algorithmic bias, following a complaint by Eric Bothorel, a member of the French parliament.
