Twitter is getting updates. It has announced significant changes to its blocking mechanism as part of a broader push for transparency. 

 

What is the update?

 

When a user blocks someone, the blocked individual is entirely prevented from accessing the blocked user’s tweets. However, the upcoming changes will no longer prevent blocked users from viewing public tweets.

This update, which is expected to come out soon, means that only private tweets will remain hidden from blocked users. While the change increases the visibility of public content, users who have been blocked will still face restrictions on interaction they will not be able to like, reply, or repost tweets of someone who has blocked them, though they can still see all public posts.

According to multiple tweets from X’s engineering team, this new policy aligns with the platform’s effort to foster transparency and open dialogue. 

Musk on X updates 

 

Elon Musk, the owner of X, has long opposed the idea of blocking, and this action follows his past criticism. 

According to him, blocking impedes the platform's free flow of information. He hinted that the blocking feature would be phased out last year, except in cases involving direct messages. 

A similar step was taken in May 2024 when the platform enabled users to view responses from people who had blocked them.

 

Public reaction

 

The majority of the public's response to the revisions has been unfavorable. Numerous people have criticized Musk and the site's engineering team for the choice. Some contend that the action goes beyond the rules of app distribution websites like the Apple App Store and Google Play Store.

Users are concerned that the modifications would give stalkers and harassers more confidence to keep an eye on their targets even after they have been blocked. 

Defense and intelligence experts have also expressed concerns about how the platform will handle content from terrorist accounts in light of the new regulation. 

Many request that Musk address how this policy may jeopardize individual safety and expose users to further hazards.

This move has sparked a heated debate about whether transparency should come at the expense of individual security.