News
Trafficking survivor has a hard question for Twitter advertisers pausing ads over Elon Musk acquisition
Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter has finally come to a close, and as he takes charge of the platform, some advertisers aren’t too happy. Citing his love for humanity, Elon Musk wrote a letter to Twitter’s advertisers emphasizing the importance of ad relevancy on Thursday.
On Friday, General Motors paused its Twitter ad spending once Elon Musk completed his takeover of the platform. Although GM is a competitor of Tesla, another company owned by Elon Musk, Tesla doesn’t pay any platform for advertising.
This news prompted human trafficking survivor advocate, Eliza Bleu, to ask GM and any other advertiser considering leaving Twitter one hard question.
“Is advertising with Elon Musk worse than with child sexual abuse material?”
In September, Twitter told advertisers found ads on profiles linked with child sex abuse. Business Insider viewed those emails sent and reported that Twitter banned accounts for violating its rules. The publication noted that some advertisers were told that Twitter suspended all ads on profiles and that it had “updated its systems” in order to detect better accounts linked to child sexual abuse material or CSAM.
Twitter told Insider that it’s working with its product teams to ensure it has the right models, processes, and products in place to help keep everyone using Twitter safe, which, in the cases of John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, don’t seem to be true. John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 are two male minors who begged Twitter to remove videos of their sexual exploitation. Twitter refused to pull down the content.
Screenshot from the lawsuit
Eliza Bleu pointed out that Twitter still hasn’t solved the CSAM problem after the ad issue. “The employees knew about the problem before the issue with the ads,” she told Teslarati. She pointed to a recent case reported by the Northampton Chronicle & Echo on Thursday.
In this case, a 22-year-old man pled guilty to three counts of making indecent photographs of children and two counts of attempting to engage in sexual communication with children. There were three Twitter accounts that shared indecent images and videos of children. The defendant was also having conversations of a sexual nature with a 13- and 14-year-old.
Eliza Bleu also pointed out that Delhi Police’s Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations blocked 23 Twitter accounts for sharing CSAM in September, as well as one in Naples, where a man was arrested with over 100 child pornography charges. The man transmitted multiple child pornography files from his Twitter and Snapchat accounts to other users.
In September, Andrea Stroppa, founder of Ghost Data and a former contributor to the World Economic Forum, released an exclusive report to Reuters with a list of over 500 accounts that openly shared or requested CSAM over a 20-day period in September. Stroppa also shared the report with Teslarati following the publishing of the Reuters article.
Those 500 accounts produced over 10,000 tweets, with almost half focusing on trading illicit material. The accounts accumulated over 2,000 unique followers.
In her question to GM, which goes for any company wanting to pause its ad spending due to Elon Musk taking ownership of Twitter, Eliza Bleu wanted to know if Elon Musk was truly worse than the exploitation of children.
Question @GM why didn’t you remove your ads from Twitter in September when you received an email from Twitter telling you that you paid to potentially run ads on child sexual abuse material imagery?
Is @elonmusk worse than child sexual abuse material?
— 𝔈𝔩𝔦𝔷𝔞 (@elizableu) October 29, 2022
Eliza told Teslarati that she is also concerned about the narratives that could be created and pushed. Narratives such as Elon Musk, the ongoing lawsuit against Twitter by John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, and CSAM on Twitter in general. There’s already a lot of misinformation about Elon Musk, and it would be easy for this topic to be weaponized against Elon Musk now that he has taken over Twitter.
These are the words that John Doe #1 said to Twitter after they refused to pull down the two male minors sexual exploitation.
The survivors were both 13 in the video. pic.twitter.com/iI6XgAmhGu
— 𝔈𝔩𝔦𝔷𝔞 (@elizableu) April 10, 2021
“Two minors are currently suing Twitter. If Elon does indeed take over Twitter and acquire Twitter, unfortunately, part of the baggage he’s going to acquire is this lawsuit. Of course, the lawsuit won’t be against him personally. It’ll be against Twitter,” Eliza said in a recent video.
Eliza has publicly offered Elon Musk and the new Twitter leadership. She’s willing to work with X (Twitter) to remove CSAM at scale. “I offered to work for free,” she said in a tweet.
In a statement to Teslarati, Eliza Bleu reaffirmed her offer to Elon Musk and the new leadership team at Twitter.
“Twitter has a long history of knowingly refusing to remove child sexual abuse material at scale. This issue has been covered by the corporate media and called out by governments around the globe. Over 32 brands removed ads from Twitter when the Reuters pieces came out in September of this year because of child sexual abuse material on Twitter. I think that General Motors’ lack of concern over sexually abused children says a lot. Survivors buy cars too. There are more survivors out there than these brands might think.”
Your feedback is essential. 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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
