News
Elon Musk’s Twitter Files reveals former executives’ abuse of power, trust & safety
Elon Musk’s Twitter Files revealed quite a bit of detail about the former executives’ abuse of power while running the platform. In November, Elon Musk promised to release evidence of Twitter’s suppression of free speech and, on Friday, announced that he would unveil Twitter’s role in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop news.
Elon Musk announced earlier on Friday that there would be a live Q&A, and we’ll update here when it goes live.
Here we go!! 🍿🍿 https://t.co/eILK9f3bAm
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 2, 2022
In his thread, Taibbi said that the Twitter Files “tell an incredible story from inside one of the world’s largest and most influential social media platforms.” He began by highlighting Twitter’s early days as a potential tool for enabling mass communication, “making a true real-time global conversation possible for the first time.”
He then shared that some of Twitter’s first tools for controlling speech were designed to combat spammers and financial fraudsters, but slowly over time, Twitter’s staff and executives began to find more users for the tools. “Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well,” Taibbi tweeted, adding that it was just a little at first, then more often, and then constantly.
9. Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party: pic.twitter.com/4uzkHnQ65E
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 2, 2022
In the tweets above, Taibbi shared screenshots documenting that requests from “connected actors to delete tweets were routine.” Executives would write one another statements such as “Move to review from the Biden team.” and another one would reply, “handled.”
In addition to that, both celebrities and “unknowns” could be removed or reviewed “at the behest of a political party.”
Taibbi noted that both parties, such as the Trump White House and the Biden campaign, had requests received and honored, but the system wasn’t balanced. Instead, he said, it was based on contacts.
“Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right.”
Taibbi shared a link with that statement from Open Secrets, which showed Twitter’s contributions to politicians. Following that, Taibbi shared more documents noting that the slant in content moderation decisions is visible and is the assessment of multiple current and high-level executives.
The Twitter Files, Part One: How and Why Twitter Blocked the Hunter Biden Laptop Story
In Part Of the Twitter Files, Taibbi started with the October 14, 2020, New York Post article titled BIDEN SECRET E-MAILS. “Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be ‘unsafe.’ They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography,” Taibbi wrote.
Taibbi shared that Twitter locked White House spokeswoman Kaleigh McEnany out of her account for tweeting about the story, which prompted a letter from the Trump campaign staffer, Mike Hahn, who said, “At least pretend to care for the next 20 days.”
In response to that, Caroline Strom, Twitter’s public policy executive, sent out a “polite WTF query.” Taibbi noted that several employees picked up on the tension between the comms and policy teams and the safety and trust teams. The former had either little or less control over moderation.
“Strom’s note returned the answer that the laptop story had been removed for violation of the company’s “hacked materials” policy,” Taibbi wrote, sharing a screenshot of an email from Elaine Ong Sotto, Ops Analyst, Global Escalations Team. He also shared an archived webpage of Twitter’s Distribution of Hacked Material policy.
Continuing his thread, Taibbi pointed out that several sources heard about a general warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks. He added that he hasn’t seen any evidence of any government involved in the laptop story. “In fact, that might have been the problem…”
He added that the decision was made at the highest levels of Twitter without the knowledge of Jack Dorsey, the platform’s then-CEO. Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s former head of legal policy and trust, played a key role, Taibbi wrote.
24. “They just freelanced it,” is how one former employee characterized the decision. “Hacking was the excuse, but within a few hours, pretty much everyone realized that wasn’t going to hold. But no one had the guts to reverse it.”
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 3, 2022
In the next tweet, Taibbi shared an exchange between Gadde and Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former trust and safety head. Trenton Kennedy, the comms official, wrote, “I’m struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe.”
Continuing on, Taibbi noted that Twitter’s former VP of Global Comms, Brandon Borrman asked if the team could truthfully claim that this was a part of Twitter’s policy. In response, the platform’s former Deputy General Counsel, Jim Baker, “seems to advise staying the non-course because ‘caution is warranted.’
Taibbi noted that a fundamental problem with tech companies and content moderation is that there are many people in charge of speech, yet they know or care little about it. He then shared an exchange between Democratic congressman Ro Khanna and Gadde.
Following the above communications, Taibbi noted that the head of public policy, Lauren Culbertson received a “ghastly letter/report from Carl Szabo of the research firm, NetChoice.” The firm polled twelve members of congress:9 Republicans and 3 Democrats from “the House Judiciary Committee to Rep. Judy Chu’s office.”
Continuing his thread, Taibbi pointed out that NetChoice informed Twitter that a “blood bath” awaited in upcoming Hill hearings. The screenshot he shared read: “High level take away–Every Republican said ‘this is a tipping point. It’s just too much.’ And both Democrats and Republicans were angry.”
The next screenshot Szabo that Taibbi shared read: “When asked just how bad this situation is, one staffer said: ‘it’s tech’s Access Hollywood moment and it has no Hillary to hide behind.’ Others were more blunt: ‘tech is screwed and rightfully so.’”
In the following screenshot, Taibbi described Szabo’s letter as containing “chilling passages relaying Democratic lawmakers’ attitudes. They want ‘more’ moderation, and as for the Bill of Rights, it’s ‘not absolute.’”
Taibbi commented that an amazing subplot of the Twitter/Hunter Biden laptop affair “was how much was done without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, and how long it took for the situation to get ‘unfucked’ (as one ex-employee put it) even after Dorsey jumped in.”
As he looked through Gadde’s emails, Taibbi noted a familiar name–his own. Jack Dorsey emailed her a copy of his Substack article blasting the incident, he noted. He added that there were multiple instances in the files where Dorsey intervened to question suspensions and other moderation actions for accounts across the political spectrum.
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
Tesla AI lead Ashok Elluswamy said this week that 24-hour Robotaxi service is close. Replying on X to a rider who wanted Cybercab trips all night, he wrote that the capability would arrive “next month or so” once “the next tech to merge on the v15 plan” is ready.
The comment landed on September 4, one day after Tesla opened public Cybercab rides in Austin. It is the clearest near-term timeline yet for overnight unsupervised operation. Tesla’s paid Robotaxi network currently runs from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. seven days a week across Austin, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa.
next month or so. the next tech to merge on the v15 plan will enable it.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) September 4, 2026
That 16-hour window is shorter than the 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. schedule the company used for much of the prior year.
Elluswamy did not name the specific feature or say whether the change would apply first to purpose-built Cybercabs, the existing Model Y fleet, or both. He also offered no city-by-city rollout list. The link to Full Self-Driving v15 is nevertheless significant.
Tesla has described v15 as a step-change architecture with seven parallel improvement tracks and roughly ten times more parameters than earlier builds. Early versions of that software already operate on the Robotaxi fleet and contain about 40 percent of the planned gains.
By July 2026, the unsupervised fleet had logged more than 380,000 miles across six cities in two states with what the company called an impeccable safety record and no notable incidents caused by the vehicles themselves. Tesla has repeatedly argued that camera-based end-to-end neural networks, rather than extra sensors, are the core of the solution.
Overnight service would test that claim in lower-light conditions and would also raise vehicle utilization, a key variable for Robotaxi unit economics. The company has already begun using public Superchargers at night and is building dedicated Robotaxi charging sites.
Riders have asked why software must change if the cars already drive in the dark. The practical answer appears to be reliability and scale: Tesla has held back mass expansion until more of the v15 stack is merged, citing the need for higher confidence before putting thousands of unoccupied vehicles on streets around the clock.
If the next module arrives on the timetable Elluswamy sketched, 24-hour service could begin in October 2026 in at least some markets.
That would mark a shift from a daytime-bounded pilot to a service that can run whenever demand exists, including the late-night hours that have so far remained out of reach.
Tesla is beginning to roll out Full Self-Driving Supervised v14.3.9 with a new active safety layer that can take control even when the driver is operating the car manually.
Tesla AI said the software can activate FSD on the driver’s behalf when an imminent collision is detected and Automatic Emergency Braking may not be enough. It may also engage if the system detects heavy distraction or an accidental FSD disengagement.
FSD Supervised v14.3.9 starting to roll out shortly
This release includes a new active safety feature set: FSD Supervised can now activate on your behalf when an imminent collision is detected and Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) may not be enough.
It may also engage if we…
— Tesla AI (@Tesla_AI) September 4, 2026
The capability is essentially Automatic Collision Evasion. However, unlike conventional AEB, which mainly applies the brakes in a straight line, this feature can use steering, braking, and acceleration together if the car calculates that stopping alone will not prevent impact and a safer path exists. The system may change lanes or move toward a shoulder when conditions allow, then continue driving after the immediate threat is handled rather than simply coming to a stop.
The intervention is meant as a last-resort safety net, not a replacement for attentive driving.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 early review: FSD saved me from an accident
Tesla’s own description still frames FSD as supervised assistance. Secondary reports on internal release notes say the feature can fire while the car is being driven manually if cabin-camera monitoring suggests the driver is not sufficiently attentive, such as reaching toward the back seat, or if FSD appears to have been turned off unintentionally.
After the emergency maneuver, the car is expected to alert the driver and request a return to manual control.
The safety case is straightforward. Many collisions happen in the last second because a driver is looking away, fumbles a control, or faces an obstacle that braking cannot fully solve. A system that can both recognize that AEB is insufficient and execute a coordinated evasive path can reduce those remaining high-severity events.
Re-engaging after accidental disengagement also addresses a practical failure mode: a small steering nudge that drops FSD at the worst moment. The advantage is a background safety net that uses the same vision stack already running in v14, instead of leaving the car solely to emergency braking once the driver is no longer in command.
The feature still depends on FSD being enabled and, according to reports, an active FSD purchase or subscription. It does not make the vehicle unsupervised. Drivers remain responsible, and Tesla has not published how often the system is expected to intervene or how it will handle false positives.
If the rollout is conservative and the false-alarm rate stays low, the update is a meaningful step: FSD is no longer only a feature the driver turns on. In the rare moments when disaster is already forming, it can step in.
Tesla launched the all-electric, steering wheel-less, and pedal-less Cybercab last night at a quiet and small event in downtown Austin, Texas.
The launch, which marked the beginning of unsupervised ride-hailing for Tesla’s Robotaxi platform with Cybercab, has already caught the attention of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) who has more questions.
NHTSA opened an Audit Query (AQ) into the Cybercab’s Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) certification that Tesla gave the vehicle. Manufacturers self-certify vehicles much of the time to avoid excessive regulatory delays.
Tesla Cybercab interior, note the lack of steering wheel and pedals. (Credit: @niccruzpatane/X< /a>)
However, the agency needs more information; it said in a summary:
“On September 3, 2026, Tesla began commercial deployment with a small number of its Cybercab vehicles in Austin, Texas. Tesla notified the Agency that it certified those Cybercab vehicles as compliant with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). Tesla also notified the Agency that it plans to gradually expand commercial deployment of the Cybercab to include additional vehicles and locations.”
It also went on to state that the Cybercab lacks traditional automotive controls, which is a groundbreaking move. The process is entirely new to the NHTSA, which gives the agency some leverage to put Tesla’s launch under a microscope:
“The vehicles lack permanently attached, conventional manual controls, such as a brake pedal, gas pedal, steering wheel, and mirrors. NHTSA is opening this AQ to examine the process and technical data on which Tesla relied when certifying the Cybercab and related issues. Among other things, NHTSA will consider the extent to which Tesla’s certification depended on determinations that certain FMVSS are inapplicable to the Cybercab.”
Tesla has added 45 Cybercab units to its fleet of Robotaxi-enabled cars in Austin, according to public documents the company submitted to the State of Texas over the past week. Enabling this level of self-driving is something Tesla has worked toward for many years, and now that it is finally here, it seems more than reasonable that regulatory agencies will have some questions.
Many outlets might try to frame this as a negative, but it is truly an agency looking to gain more information about groundbreaking tech that Tesla has been developing for years.
In an effort to keep riders, pedestrians, and property safe, any and all data accumulated from these first days, weeks, and months of rides will likely be shared with the NHTSA to enable broader rollout strategies across the United States and more in the future.
Tesla Robotaxi will be a 24/7 service: here’s when
Tesla Full Self-Driving will now overtake manual driving to avoid disaster
