Musk Says $44 Bln Twitter Deal on Hold over Fake Account Data

Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the opening of the Tesla factory Berlin Brandenburg in Gruenheide, Germany, Tuesday, March 22, 2022. (AP)
Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the opening of the Tesla factory Berlin Brandenburg in Gruenheide, Germany, Tuesday, March 22, 2022. (AP)
TT

Musk Says $44 Bln Twitter Deal on Hold over Fake Account Data

Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the opening of the Tesla factory Berlin Brandenburg in Gruenheide, Germany, Tuesday, March 22, 2022. (AP)
Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the opening of the Tesla factory Berlin Brandenburg in Gruenheide, Germany, Tuesday, March 22, 2022. (AP)

Elon Musk tweeted on Friday that his $44-billion cash deal for Twitter Inc was "temporarily on hold” while he waits for the social media company to provide data on the proportion of its fake accounts.

Twitter shares initially fell more than 20% in premarket trading, but after Musk, the chief executive of electric car market Tesla Inc, sent a second tweet saying he remained committed to the deal, they regained some ground.

The shares were down 8.6% to $41.19 in midday trading on Friday, a steep discount to the $54.20 per share acquisition price.

Musk, the world's richest person, decided to waive due diligence when he agreed to buy Twitter on April 25, in an effort to get the San Francisco-based company to accept his "best and final offer." This could make it harder for him to argue that Twitter somehow misled him.

Since then, technology stocks have plunged amid investor concerns over inflation and a potential economic slowdown.

The spread between the offer price and the value of Twitter shares had widened in recent days, implying less than a 50% chance of completion, as investors speculated that the downturn would prompt Musk to walk or seek a lower price.

"Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5% of users," Musk told his more than 92 million Twitter followers.

Twitter is planning no immediate action as a result of Musk's comment, people familiar with the matter said. The company considered the comment disparaging and a violation of the terms of their deal contract, but was encouraged by Musk subsequently tweeting he was committing to the acquisition, the sources added.

Musk came to Twitter's office for a meeting on May 6 as part of the transaction planning process, a Twitter spokesperson said.

There was no immediate reaction from the investors that Musk tapped last week to raise $7.1 billion in funding.

Spam or fake accounts are designed to manipulate or artificially boost activity on services like Twitter. Some create an impression that something or someone is more popular.

Musk tweeted a Reuters story from ten days ago that cited the fake account figures. Twitter has said that the figures were an estimate and that the actual number may be higher.

The estimated number of spam accounts on the microblogging site has held steady below 5% since 2013, according to regulatory filings from Twitter, prompting some analysts to question why Musk was raising it now.

"This 5% metric has been out for some time. He clearly would have already seen it... So it may well be more part of the strategy to lower the price," said Susannah Streeter, an analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown.

Representatives for Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Reuters.

Tesla's stock rose 4% on Friday morning. The shares have lost about a quarter of their value since Musk disclosed a stake in Twitter of April 4, amid concerns he will get distracted as Tesla's chief executive and that he may have to sell more Tesla shares to fund the deal.

There is plenty of precedent for a potential renegotiation of the price following a market downturn. Several companies repriced agreed acquisitions when the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in 2020 and delivered a global economic shock.

In one instance, French retailer LVMH threatened to walk away from a deal with Tiffany & Co. The US jewelry retailer agreed to lower the price by $425 million to $15.8 billion.

Acquirers seeking a get out sometimes turn to "material adverse effect" clauses in their merger agreement, arguing the target company has been significantly damaged.

But the language in the Twitter deal agreement, as in many recent mergers, does not allow Musk to walk away because of a deteriorating business environment, such as a drop in demand for advertising or because Twitter's shares have plunged.

Musk is contractually obligated to pay Twitter a $1 billion break-up fee if he does not complete the deal, and the language in the deal contract appears to cap any damages that Twitter can seek from Musk to that level.

But the contract also contains a "specific performance" clause that a judge can cite to force Musk to complete the deal.

In practice, acquirers who lose a specific performance case are almost never forced to complete an acquisition and typically negotiate a monetary settlement with their targets.

"The nature of Musk creating so much uncertainty in a tweet (and not a filing) is very troubling to us and the Street and now sends this whole deal into a circus show with many questions and no concrete answers as to the path of this deal going forward," Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives wrote in a note.

Defeat the bots

Musk has said that if he buys Twitter he "will defeat the spam bots or die trying" and has blamed the company's reliance on advertising for why it has let spam bots proliferate.

He has also been critical of Twitter's moderation policy and has said he wants Twitter's algorithm to prioritize tweets to be public and was against too much power on the service to corporations that advertise.

Nevertheless, Musk is targeting advertising revenue to more than double by 2028, according to slides he presented to investors that were reported by the New York Times.

Ads are expected to make up about 45% of Twitter's total revenue by that time, down from nearly all of its revenue today, according to the investor presentation.

Earlier this week, Musk said he would reverse Twitter's ban on former US President Donald Trump when he buys the social media platform, signaling his intention to cut moderation.

Trump, who started a rival site called Truth Social, took to his own platform to weigh in on the fracas.

"There is no way Elon Musk is going to buy Twitter at such a ridiculous price, especially since realizing it is a company largely based on bots or spam accounts," Trump wrote in a post, adding that his site is much better.



Meta, TikTok and YouTube Face Landmark Trial over Youth Addiction Claims

FILE PHOTO: The logo of Meta is seen at Porte de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: The logo of Meta is seen at Porte de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File Photo
TT

Meta, TikTok and YouTube Face Landmark Trial over Youth Addiction Claims

FILE PHOTO: The logo of Meta is seen at Porte de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: The logo of Meta is seen at Porte de Versailles exhibition center in Paris, France, June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File Photo

Three of the world's biggest tech companies face a landmark trial in Los Angeles starting this week over claims that their platforms — Meta's Instagram, ByteDance's TikTok and Google's YouTube — deliberately addict and harm children.

Jury selection starts this week in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. It's the first time the companies will argue their case before a jury, and the outcome could have profound effects on their businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms. The selection process is expected to take at least a few days, with 75 potential jurors questioned each day through at least Thursday. A fourth company named in the lawsuit, Snapchat parent company Snap Inc., settled the case last week for an undisclosed sum.

At the core of the case is a 19-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM," whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury and what damages, if any, may be awarded, said Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

KGM claims that her use of social media from an early age addicted her to the technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. Importantly, the lawsuit claims that this was done through deliberate design choices made by companies that sought to make their platforms more addictive to children to boost profits. This argument, if successful, could sidestep the companies' First Amendment shield and Section 230, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms.

“Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue,” the lawsuit says.

Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the trial, which will last six to eight weeks. Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in healthcare costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

“Plaintiffs are not merely the collateral damage of Defendants’ products,” the lawsuit says. “They are the direct victims of the intentional product design choices made by each Defendant. They are the intended targets of the harmful features that pushed them into self-destructive feedback loops.”

The tech companies dispute the claims that their products deliberately harm children, citing a bevy of safeguards they have added over the years and arguing that they are not liable for content posted on their sites by third parties.

“Recently, a number of lawsuits have attempted to place the blame for teen mental health struggles squarely on social media companies,” Meta said in a recent blog post. "But this oversimplifies a serious issue. Clinicians and researchers find that mental health is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue, and trends regarding teens' well-being aren't clear-cut or universal. Narrowing the challenges faced by teens to a single factor ignores the scientific research and the many stressors impacting young people today, like academic pressure, school safety, socio-economic challenges and substance abuse."

Meta, YouTube and TikTok did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.

The case will be the first in a slew of cases beginning this year that seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children's mental well-being. A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.


EU Says WhatsApp to Face Stricter Content Rules

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Whatsapp logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Whatsapp logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
TT

EU Says WhatsApp to Face Stricter Content Rules

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Whatsapp logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Whatsapp logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

WhatsApp is set to face greater EU scrutiny after the European Commission on Monday added the platform to its list of digital firms big enough to face stricter content rules, AFP reported.

The Meta-owned company joins Facebook, TikTok, X and others in a list of 26 "very large online platforms" with more than 45 million monthly active users in the European Union, a commission statement said.

As such it will face tougher obligations under the bloc's Digital Services Act (DSA), but they will apply only to WhatsApp channels, a broadcasting feature, rather than the platform's core messaging feature.


Social Media Giants Face Landmark Trial Over Addiction Claims

The TikTok logo is displayed at a TikTok office on January 23, 2026 in Culver City, California. (Getty Images/AFP)
The TikTok logo is displayed at a TikTok office on January 23, 2026 in Culver City, California. (Getty Images/AFP)
TT

Social Media Giants Face Landmark Trial Over Addiction Claims

The TikTok logo is displayed at a TikTok office on January 23, 2026 in Culver City, California. (Getty Images/AFP)
The TikTok logo is displayed at a TikTok office on January 23, 2026 in Culver City, California. (Getty Images/AFP)

A landmark trial beginning this week in Los Angeles could establish a legal precedent on whether social media companies deliberately designed their platforms to addict children.

Jury selection is set to start in California state court on Tuesday in what is being called a "bellwether" proceeding because its outcome could set the tone for a tidal wave of similar litigation across the United States.

Defendants in the suit are Alphabet, ByteDance and Meta, the tech titans behind YouTube, TikTok and Instagram.

Meta co-founder and chief executive Mark Zuckerberg is slated to be called as a witness during the trial.

Social media firms are accused in the hundreds of lawsuits of addicting young users to content that has led to depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalization and even suicide.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs are explicitly borrowing strategies used against the tobacco industry in the 1990s and 2000s that faced a similar onslaught of lawsuits arguing that companies sold a defective product.

The trial before Judge Carolyn Kuhl in state court is expected to start the first week of February, after a jury is selected.

It focuses on allegations that a 19-year-old woman identified by the initials K.G.M. suffered severe mental harm because she was addicted to social media.

"This is the first time that a social media company has ever had to face a jury for harming kids," said Social Media Victims Law Center founder Matthew Bergman, whose team is involved in more than 1,000 such cases.

The center is a legal organization dedicated to holding social media companies accountable for harms caused to young people online.

"The fact that now K.G.M. and her family get to stand in a courtroom equal to the largest, most powerful and wealthy companies in the world is, in and of itself, a very significant victory," Bergman said.

"We understand that these cases are hard fought and that it is our burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that K.G.M. was harmed by the design decisions of these companies - that's a burden that we happily undertake."

- Design not content -

A decisive outcome of the trial could provide a "data point" for settling similar cases en masse, according to Bergman.

Snapchat last week confirmed that it made a deal to avoid the civil trial accusing it, along with Meta, TikTok and YouTube, of addicting young people to social media.

The terms of that deal were not disclosed.

Internet titans have argued that they are shielded by Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which frees them of responsibility for what social media users post.

However, this case argues those firms are culpable for business models designed to hold people's attention and promote content that winds up harming their mental health.

"We are not faulting the social media companies for failure to remove malign content from their platforms," Bergman told AFP.

"We are faulting them for designing their platforms to addict kids and for developing algorithms that show kids not what they want to see but what they cannot look away from."

Lawsuits accusing social media platforms of practices endangering young users are also making their way through federal court in Northern California and state courts across the country.