Hundreds of thousands of dissatisfied users have reportedly fled Elon Musk’s X, previously known as Twitter, following Donald Trump’s re-election, with an estimated 115,000 accounts deactivated in the US alone on the day after the ballot.

Celebrities and prominent brands ditching the platform cite mounting concerns over the unchecked spread of misinformation, conspiracy theories and hate speech, as well as what they consider to be Musk’s role in facilitating Trump’s return to power.

“X is a toxic media platform and (…) its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse,” news media The Guardian said in a statement announcing it would no longer be posting on the platform.

But, determining the exact number of users leaving X is challenging, as the platform does not regularly release global user data.

The Euroverify team takes a look at what we know about the number of users deserting X and the platforms to which they are migrating.

How many people are on X and how many are leaving?

Estimates of X’s monthly global user base vary widely. The most generous estimates — used by research agencies and prominent business media — place the number of users at 611 million in April of this year, with a 6% drop to 588 million by September.

While many experts contest these figures, there has been a trend of declining user numbers on the platform since the 2022 Musk takeover, driven by departures in Western democracies. 

X is legally obliged to disclose its user numbers in the EU under the requirements of the bloc’s digital rulebook, the Digital Services Act (DSA).

Its reports show that the average number of EU monthly users fell from 111.4 million in the six months leading up to January 2024 to 106 million in the six months leading up to July.

Although it doesn’t reflect user numbers in other regions of the world, it is the only official data provided by X that shows a trend of decline in users.

An analysis by Financial Times analysts also suggests X user numbers have fallen by almost a third in the UK and almost a fifth in the US in the year leading up to September 2024.

A closer look at the data shows that user numbers have fallen in 25 of 27 EU member states over the past year, with only Germany and Finland seeing an uptick in numbers.

The drop in user numbers has coincided with a decline in financial prospects, with some estimating the company has lost 75% of its value since it was bought by Musk.

Where are they migrating?

Bluesky, a platform developed by Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, is a popular destination for emigrating X users.

Its CEO Jay Graber revealed earlier this week that users had hit 20 million after averaging 1 million new users per day over a five-day period. Its user numbers have more than tripled since late August. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Mastodon, developed by a German non-profit, is also welcoming users from X. Its app downloads are up 47% on iOS and 17% on Android this month according to its creator Eugen Rochko.

But Meta’s Threads, rolled out last year, remains the direct competitor with most active users, estimated at around 275 million.

Could Bluesky be the next big thing?

Given its proximity to the original Twitter interface and its emphasis on content moderation, Bluesky is being widely tipped as the biggest threat to X.

“It certainly seems like an inflection point. Bluesky’s growth over the past couple of years has tended to be directly correlated with Elon Musk’s actions,” David Karpf, associate professor at the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, told Euronews.

ADVERTISEMENT

He believes Musk’s use of the platform to propel Donald Trump’s campaign has played a significant role in convincing more users to leave the platform.

“It’s all been a trickle (of users leaving) up until the past month or two,” he explained. “But it seems like what happened during the election (means that) an awful lot of people who were using X decided, this is not for me.”

Bluesky operates independently to ensure big corporations do not influence its decisions, and users are able to select and fine-tune the algorithm that decides the content they are exposed to through custom feeds.

It has introduced new “anti-toxicity features”, such as the ability to detach your own post from a “quote post” made by another user. Replies to posts can also be hidden.

ADVERTISEMENT

It also has strong blocking features, often described as a “nuclear block”, designed to stamp out harassment and abuse.

But there are concerns that if politics becomes the motive for the exodus from X to Bluesky, the platforms could splinter into two echo chambers, split along political and ideological lines.

For American writer and media critic Parer Molloy, concerns about Bluesky becoming an ideological ‘bubble’ are unfounded: “It’s not about avoiding disagreement — it’s about fostering an environment where disagreements can actually happen productively,” she wrote this week.

“On platforms like X, the problem isn’t just opposing views — it’s the sheer volume of hate, harassment, and dehumanising rhetoric that gets amplified by algorithms.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Mary Louis’ excitement to move into an apartment in Massachusetts in the spring of 2021 turned to dismay when Louis, a Black woman, received an email saying that a “third-party service” had denied her tenancy.

That third-party service included an algorithm designed to score rental applicants, which became the subject of a class action lawsuit, with Louis at the helm, alleging that the algorithm discriminated on the basis of race and income.

A federal judge approved a settlement in the lawsuit, one of the first of it’s kind, on Wednesday, with the company behind the algorithm agreeing to pay over $2.2 million and roll back certain parts of it’s screening products that the lawsuit alleged were discriminatory.

The settlement does not include any admissions of fault by the company SafeRent Solutions, which said in a statement that while it “continues to believe the SRS Scores comply with all applicable laws, litigation is time-consuming and expensive.”

While such lawsuits might be relatively new, the use of algorithms or artificial intelligence programs to screen or score Americans isn’t. For years, AI has been furtively helping make consequential decisions for U.S. residents.

When a person submits a job application, applies for a home loan or even seeks certain medical care, there’s a chance that an AI system or algorithm is scoring or assessing them like it did Louis. Those AI systems, however, are largely unregulated, even though some have been found to discriminate.

“Management companies and landlords need to know that they’re now on notice, that these systems that they are assuming are reliable and good are going to be challenged,” said Todd Kaplan, one of Louis’ attorneys.

The lawsuit alleged SafeRent’s algorithm didn’t take into account the benefits of housing vouchers, which they said was an important detail for a renter’s ability to pay the monthly bill, and it therefore discriminated against low-income applicants who qualified for the aid.

The suit also accused SafeRent’s algorithm of relying too much on credit information. They argued that it fails to give a full picture of an applicant’s ability to pay rent on time and unfairly dings applicants with housing vouchers who are Black and Hispanic partly because they have lower median credit scores, attributable to historical inequities.

Christine Webber, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys, said that just because an algorithm or AI is not programmed to discriminate, the data an algorithm uses or weights could have “the same effect as if you told it to discriminate intentionally.”

When Louis’ application was denied, she tried appealing the decision, sending two landlords’ references to show she’d paid rent early or on time for 16 years, even if she didn’t have a strong credit history.

Louis, who had a housing voucher, was scrambling, having already given notice to her previous landlord that she was moving out, and she was charged with taking care of her granddaughter.

The response from the management company, which used SafeRent’s screening service, read, “We do not accept appeals and cannot override the outcome of the Tenant Screening.”

Louis felt defeated; the algorithm didn’t know her, she said.

“Everything is based on numbers. You don’t get the individual empathy from them,” said Louis. “There is no beating the system. The system is always going to beat us.”

While state lawmakers have proposed aggressive regulations for these types of AI systems, the proposals have largely failed to get enough support. That means lawsuits like Louis’ are starting to lay the groundwork for AI accountability.

SafeRent’s defense attorneys argued in a motion to dismiss that the company shouldn’t be held liable for discrimination because SafeRent wasn’t making the final decision on whether to accept or deny a tenant. The service would screen applicants, score them and submit a report, but leave it to landlords or management companies to accept or deny a tenant.

Louis’ attorneys, along with the U.S. Department of Justice, which submitted a statement of interest in the case, argued that SafeRent’s algorithm could be held accountable because it still plays a role in access to housing. The judge denied SafeRent’s motion to dismiss on those counts.

The settlement stipulates that SafeRent can’t include its score feature on its tenant screening reports in certain cases, including if the applicant is using a housing voucher. It also requires that if SafeRent develops another screening score it plans to use, it must be validated by a third-party that the plaintiffs agree to.

Louis’ son found an affordable apartment for her on Facebook Marketplace that she has since moved into, though it was $200 more expensive and in a less desirable area.

“I’m not optimistic that I’m going to catch a break, but I have to keep on keeping, that’s it,” said Louis. “I have too many people who rely on me.”

___

Jesse Bedayn is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

12,000-year-old perforated stones found over years of excavations in Israel may “represent early evidence for the adoption of spinning with the ’spindle and whorl’ device,” according to newly published research in PLOS ONE.

The wheel-shaped stones were found at Nahal Ein-Gev II in the Jordan Valley of Israel, over many years of excavations. A total of 113 perforated stones have been discovered in the area since 1972. 

Of those stones found, 48 of them had complete perforation, 36 were broken items with partial holes present and 29 were unfinished items with one or two drill marks, according to the research. 

MOM, SON DIG UP ANCIENT OBJECT OFTEN FOUND NEAR BURIAL GROUNDS WHILE GARDENING

The stones were “dominantly limestone,” co-authors Talia Yasuv and Leore Grosman of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem wrote in their published research, ranging in weight from 1 to 34 grams. 

Researchers came up with several theories about what these perforated stones could be.

“An initial thought was they may have been related to fishing,” Yasuv told Fox News Digital in an email. Researchers ultimately came to the conclusion that, because of the shape of the stones, the material, plus the shape and size of the holes made, that they were most likely spindle whorls. 

The perforated stones were found during excavations of the Nahal Ein Gev II (NEG II) in Israel’s Jordan Valley.  (Naftali Hilger)

ARCHAEOLOGISTS FIND SEVERAL ROCK CARVINGS OF ANCIENT BOARD GAME DATING BACK 4,000 YEARS

High-resolution 3D models were used in this research to study the stones in much more detail. 

“For the naked eye, the collection of stones seems highly variable, with no standardization in the sense that every stone in the assemblage is different and unique,” Yashuv said. 

“However, the 3D analysis pointed out morphological parameters that showed there are standard measures — for example, width/length ratio, a central location of the centre of mass, the fact that the perforations were located at that point too, and that the minimal width of the perforation is at a constant measure,” Yashuv continued.

The authors of the study noted that their theory could be strengthened by “use wear analysis,” but explained that the particular method was “beyond the scope of the present article.” 

The stones were observed in great detail by researchers to gather a better understanding of their past use. Research included 3D modeling as well as a test with replicas to test the stones’ functionality as spindle whorls.  (Laurent Davin)

FLORIDA PROFESSOR FIND EVIDENCE THAT ANCIENT EGYPTIANS DRANK HALLUCINOGENIC COCKTAILS

What was done as part of this study, beyond 3D modeling, was a feasibility test to test the functionality of the items as ancient spindle whorls. This was done with the help of Yonit Kristal, a traditional craft-making expert, per the study. 

“Although those parameters pointed to the functionality of spindle whorls, we were left with a doubt and therefore ran a feasibility test with replicas we produced,” Yashuv said.

Though Kristal’s first initial attempt didn’t work well, the authors explained in their research, she eventually was able to spin both wool and flax using the pebbles as spindle whorls.   

“Surprisingly, the experiment demonstrated that not only do the replicas function well as spindle whorls, but that the parameters we suspected as disadvantageous were actually beneficial for this purpose,” Yashuv said. 

Yashuv believes that this discovery is bigger than just a matter of “who’s first.” 

“The ‘earliest’ spindle whorl could easily become irrelevant when an additional earlier find will be found,” Yashuv pointed out. “However, since we suggest an explanation to how come the innovation disappeared, if an earlier find would be retrieved, it could join into the general scheme we presented.”   

Through the multistep process of studying the perforated rocks, the researchers came to the conclusion that these items could have been spindle whorls that were used to spin fibers. 

“In a cumulative evolutionary trend, they manifest early phases of the development of rotational technologies by laying the mechanical principle of the wheel and axle,” the researcher wrote in their study. “All in all, it reflects on the technological innovations that played an important part in the Neolithization processes of the Southern Levant.”