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.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
