Connect with us
Is Twitter retaliating against verified users for supporting Elon Musk? Is Twitter retaliating against verified users for supporting Elon Musk?

News

Is Twitter retaliating against verified users for supporting Elon Musk?

Published

on

Is Twitter retaliating against verified users for supporting Elon Musk? It seems like it in the case of Andrea Stroppa, a former contributor to the World Economic Forum, and cyber security researcher focusing on digital communication, and social media.

Andreas’s research includes topics such as digital propaganda, bots, and counterfeiting. He’s been mentioned in academic papers, media outlets, and think tanks. Andrea told me that the U.S. Government cited his work on digital counterfeiting in a report for the President of the U.S.

Andrea has been very outspoken about Twitter’s bot problems and he’s backed his claims up with hours of research shared in detailed threads. Elon Musk followed him earlier this year after interacting with some of those threads.

My friend and fellow journalist, Eva Fox, (Tesmanian) first pointed out the observation. She tweeted that Andrea lost his blue checkmark because he changed his Twitter name to avoid messages from verified bots sending out malicious links signed with “Twitter support.”

Eva pointed out to me that this isn’t just wrong, but it’s a policy that encourages the proliferation of bot/spam accounts. The real question is how do these scam bots get verified without losing their verification status when changing their names? @Nfkmobile posed that question and noted that it does look like an inside job.

Andrea has been keeping up with the Twitter and scam bots and I’ve written about a few of those threads in the articles below.

Advertisement

How Andrea lost his Twitter verification status.

Andrea shared the full story with me on how he lost his Twitter verification status. He has been constantly bombarded by verified accounts sending him fake logins to compromise his account. Thinking that his user name was on some list of malicious actors, he decided to protect his account by changing it.

The verified account harassing him, Andrea told me, was the former head of communication at Zoom, who told Teslarati in a statement that they were working with Twitter to recover their account.

Andrea wasn’t aware that if you changed your user name, you lose your verification.

Although the verified account is allowed by Twitter to continue its phishing, Andrea was punished for protecting his account. Still, he opened a ticket and Twitter sent him a general link about verification. So he re-applied and two days later, was denied because he didn’t  “their notoriety requirements.”

Andrea told me that he’s often flooded with spam and insults from trolls and bots. In a statement to Teslarati, he said:

Advertisement

“Companies like Twitter have colossal power and so a considerable responsibility. It’s worrying if Twitter starts retaliating against users because it breaks the trust between users and the company. I’m not against Twitter. I love Twitter.”

“In fact, I think that Twitter deserves better and most of the employees are great people, but I’m worried that some leadership members are betraying the little blue bird. In the Divine Comedy, Dante Alighieri considered one of the worst sins the betray.”

“I worked on these topics, bots, and digital propaganda, for years and I have a good relationship with many reporters. With some of them, I said: you’re all underestimating Elon’s questions. These questions he posed are fundamental, and sooner or later, the truth will come up. And it’s coming.”

Twitter, Elon Musk, Bots, shadow banning & more.

In many cases, Twitter has been known to randomly shadow ban and even suspend accounts that have interacted with Elon Musk. It happened to me. My account was suspended in 2020 after Elon replied to me about shipping ventilators to Louisiana during Covid-19.

Advertisement

It was a horrible feeling losing my account. After several months, I got it back, and was verified less than a year later. However, I’ve seen other friends who were verified lose their status. And have seen friends lose their accounts for absolutely no reason at all. Even Teslarati was shadow banned until Elon Musk questioned why with one single emoji.

And now, Andrea took measures to protect his account from verified crypto scam bots that Twitter allows to freely change their names and loses his status. Andrea’s threads are highly visible and with Elon Musk following him, it sure does look suspicious that Twitter will allow these crypto scam bots to continue while actively refusing to give Andrea his verification status back.

Advertisement

In the tweet below, Gail Alfar found that a Fox News account based in North Carolina was also promoting crypto scams in response to one of Elon Musk’s tweets.

The fact that Andrea has been documenting the bots with his threads has not gone unnoticed. And now that he was a target of the very bots and scam accounts that he was documenting, he took steps to protect his account and lost his verification. Twitter’s refusal to verify Andrea while allowing these bots and crypto scam accounts to continue has me wondering if Twitter is actually retaliating against verified users for supporting Elon Musk.

Advertisement

It sounds extreme, but in Andrea’s case, one has to wonder. Although I am not personally accusing them of such, Twitter’s actions make it look really, really bad. One way the network can prove itself is by restoring Andrea’s verification. Another way is to actually suspend these verified bot and crypto accounts. Even Elon Musk has called Twitter out on them.

Note: Johnna is a Tesla shareholder and supports its mission. 

Advertisement

Your feedback is important. If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1

 

 

 

Advertisement

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling

ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.

Published

on

By

ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.

The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.

Additionally,  ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.

SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise

Advertisement

The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.

The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Published

on

elon-musk-jim-farley-tesla-ford

Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.

The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.

Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):

“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”

Advertisement

Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.

Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:

“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”

Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.

Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges

Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.

Advertisement

Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.

Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch

NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.

Published

on

By

NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.

Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.

Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.

SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket

Advertisement

Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.

The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.

The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.

Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.

Advertisement

The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.

Continue Reading