Elon Musk has yet another class action lawsuit to contend with over his handling of mass layoffs at Twitter. The latest comes from two former employees who allege “women were significantly affected more than men” in the November layoffs that cut nearly half its workforce.

According to the lawsuit, a total of 57% of women employees were laid off, compared with just 47 percent of men. It goes on to note that the disparity can’t be explained “based upon a justification that Musk intended to retain more employees in engineering-related roles” because women engineers were also cut at a higher rate than their male counterparts.

It states that “63% of females in engineering-related roles were laid off on November 4, 2022, while 48% of male employees in engineering-related [roles] were laid off.” For non-engineering roles, there was also a “great disparity” between men and women who lost jobs, with 51% of women and 42% of men affected by the cuts.

The lawsuit also cites numerous tweets from Musk that show his “discriminatory animus against women,” and claims that his requirements for employees to work up to 12-hour days as part of an “extremely hardcore” Twitter 2.0 is also has a “a disproportionate impact on women, who are more often caregivers for children and other family members, and thus not able to comply with such demands.”

The lawsuit is at least the fourth class action suit brought against the company following mass layoffs in November. Former employees and contractors are also suing the company over violations of the US Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, which stipulates companies with more than 100 employees must provide at least 60 days notice ahead of mass job cuts. Another former employee has brought a suit against the company, alleging that Musk’s demand forcing all workers back to the office discriminates against people with disabilities.

Elsewhere, Musk is also facing an investigation from San Francisco city officials in the wake of reports that Twitter has set up hotel-like bedrooms inside of its offices for employees. 

Three Democratic lawmakers in the House are demanding answers from Elon Musk about a recent “platform manipulation campaign” related to recent protests in China. In a letter to the Twitter CEO, Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi, Adam Schiff and Jackie Speier write that they have “deep concern” about the recent spam campaign that drowned out tweets about the protests.

The lawmakers want Musk to answer questions about whether Twitter has any evidence the spam campaign was a state-backed effort by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). “To ensure that the United States is prepared to counter, thwart, and deter foreign influence threats online, it is critical that we understand the extent of the PRC’s potential manipulation of Twitter and identify how recent changes at Twitter are affecting the threat of CCP foreign influence operations on social media,” they write.

The lawmakers also address recent changes at Twitter under Musk’s leadership, with questions about what Twitter’s “emphasis on free speech” means for information access on the platform; as well as whether the company has the “capacity” to identify platform manipulation campaigns.

Since Musk took over Twitter, questions have swirled about how he will handle the platform’s dealings with Chinese officials, such as requests to remove “state affiliated” labels from their accounts. Tesla, the other company Musk runs, is highly dependent on China for manufacturing.

So far, Musk hasn’t publicly acknowledged the letter, which provides a December 31st deadline for a response. Twitter no longer has a communications team. However, Musk has shown little regard for other letters from lawmakers. He recently addressed a letter from Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey about Twitter’s failure to stop impersonation attempts with a dismissive tweet.

Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, Theranos’ former chief operating officer, has been sentenced to nearly 13 years in prison. Balwani was found guilty of all charges in a trial earlier this year that charged him with defrauding the blood testing startup’s patients and investors.

Of note, his sentence is slightly longer than the 11-year and three month sentence given to Elizabeth Holmes, the former CEO of Theranos. Ahead of his sentencing, Balwani’s legal team had asked for probation or house arrest, The Wall Street Journal reported. A probation officer had recommended a nine-year sentence, while prosecutors wanted 15 years in prison.

Balwani will also have to pay restitution, though the amount hasn't yet been set. He is due to surrender March 15th.

Unlike Holmes, who was not convicted on seven out of 11 total fraud charges in her trial, Balwani was convicted of defrauding Theranos patients in addition to the company’s wealthy investors. As COO, Balwani oversaw the operations of the company’s troubled laboratory, and prosecutors argued that he had detailed knowledge of problems with its blood tests and the risk they posed to patients.

Though Balwani never rose to the same level of fame as his former partner during his time at Theranos, his relationship with Holmes has played heavily into the intrigue surrounding the company’s downfall. Holmes and Balwani’s relationship featured prominently in The Dropout, a Hulu miniseries about Theranos, and text messages between the two were read aloud in both trials. 

When Holmes took the stand in her own defense, she said Balwani had been abusive, and had misled her about issues in the company’s lab. 

Developing…

Instagram’s latest update aims to help creators better understand one of the most frustrating aspects of the app: the dreaded “shadowban.” The app is updating its account status feature to help creators “understand if their account’s content is eligible to be recommended to non-followers.”

With the change, Instagram will allow anyone using a “professional” account to see when one of their posts has been blocked from recommendations. The notice will appear in the app’s “account status feature,” and tell users why the post has been blocked from non-followers. It will also offer creators the chance to appeal the decision if they think Instagram made a mistake.

For now, the feature only covers specific posts that have been blocked from recommendations in Explore, Feed and Reels. But the company says it’s working on expanding the feature so creators will know if they are blocked from suggestions at the account level as well, such as in search or “suggested accounts.”

Though Instagram avoids using the word “shadowban,” the change is clearly meant to address long-running complaints from creators about why their posts aren’t being distributed in the way they expect. To diffuse these concerns, the company has tried in recent years to better explain how its algorithm works, and pointed to its recommendation guidelines to help creators understand the inner workings of the app.

By now showing users exactly why their content is being removed from recommendations, the company is hoping creators will be able to take steps to “fix” their mistakes. At the very least, it could give creators some satisfaction to see an acknowledgement that their content has indeed been reduced in visibility, and provide the opportunity to ask for a second look. An Instagram spokesperson said review teams will work “as quickly as possible,” but didn’t say how long the step could take.

In a video posted to Twitter, Instagram head Adam Mosseri said the company was making the change in the “spirit of transparency” and said the company was on a “longer path to try and be more transparent” with users. Additionally, he said Instagram is also testing a feature that will alert users when the app is experiencing a bug.

The company has talked about notifications for service outages in the past, but the latest version will also alert users if there are bugs affecting specific features like Stories, according to images shared by Mosseri. He cited past bugs with “unfortunate timing,” that cause people to “assume the worst,” about the company. The feature will be only a test within the United States to start.

Snapchat is testing out a new way for its augmented reality lens creators to make money from their creations. The company is experimenting with a new feature that will allow creators to sell paid upgrades to lenses with Snapchat’s in-app currency .

Creators have flexibility in terms of the “digital goods” they can build into their existing lens. It could be a new effect within the lens, new editing tools or some other kind of “power up” that enhances the effect, according to Snap’s Sophia Dominguez, who leads the company’s AR partnerships with creators.

For its initial rollout, Snap has opted to work with creators behind some of the app’s most popular effects, like the “potato lens” (pictured in the top image). With the unlockable upgrades, fans will now be able to use tokens to change up the effect with different features like a magic wand or a police officer costume. For now, only a handful of creators have access to the feature, which will only be available in Australia and New Zealand to start.

Snapchat’s augmented reality effects have long been one of the biggest draws of the app, which has benefitted from numerous viral lenses over the years. But until now, users have been able to access all of these effects for free. And augmented reality creators hoping to monetize their work have primarily relied on partnerships with brands, which hire them to create custom lenses.

Dominguez says upgradable lenses could be an important way for more AR creators to make a living from their work. It could also prove lucrative for Snap, which has increasingly been experimenting with non-advertising sources of revenue. The company for now isn’t disclosing details about its arrangements with creators on sales of within lenses, but the company already makes money from Snap Tokens, which can also be used for game upgrades or to tip creators in the app.

Of course, all this depends on Snapchat users being willing to spend money to get exclusive new augmented reality effects, which is far from a given. “We actually have no idea how this is going to go,” Dominguez tells Engadget. “We can't guarantee anything, but we really do hope that because this is largely coming from our AR developers and this is also revenue that goes to them, their subscribers will support them.”

More than a year after Meta asked the Oversight Board to weigh in on its cross-check rules, the group has finally published its full policy advisory on the topic. The board found that the program, which creates a separate content moderation process for certain high-profile users, prioritizes the company’s business over the rights of its users.

“In our review, we found several shortcomings in Meta’s cross-check program,” the board writes in its assessment. “While Meta told the Board that cross-check aims to advance Meta’s human rights commitments, we found that the program appears more directly structured to satisfy business concerns.” Notably, the critique echoes that of whistleblower Frances Haugen, who revealed explosive details about cross-check last year, and has said that Meta “chooses profits over safety.”

Cross-check, or xcheck, is an internal program at Facebook and Instagram that shields celebrities, politicians, and other high-profile users from the company’s automated content moderation systems. Meta has characterized it as a “second layer of review” to avoid mistakenly removing posts. But disclosures made by Haugen showed the program includes millions of accounts, and has enabled billions of views on posts that would have otherwise been taken down. The Oversight Board itself has accused Meta of being not “fully forthcoming” about the program, which was a central issue in the board’s handling of the suspension of former President Donald Trump.

The Oversight Board’s policy advisory opinion, or PAO, on the program is the most detailed to look to date at Meta’s evolving cross-check rules. The board writes at length about two separate cross-check processes: Early Response Secondary Review (ERSR), which is reserved for certain high-profile users determined by Meta, and General Secondary Review (GSR), a newer system that uses an algorithm to automatically flag some types of posts from across its platform for additional review. GSR, which can apply to content from any Facebook or Instagram user, began in 2021 “in response to criticism” related to Haugen’s disclosures in the Facebook Papers.

But according to the Oversight Board, both cross-check systems have serious issues. Both operate with a “consistent backlog of cases,” which lengthens the amount of time potentially rule-breaking content is left up. “Meta told the Board, that, on average, it can take more than five days to reach a decision on content from users on its cross-check lists,” the group notes. “This means that, because of cross-check, content identified as breaking Meta’s rules is left up on Facebook and Instagram when it is most viral and could cause harm.”

The board sheds new light on one such case, pointing to a 2019 incident in which Brazilian soccer star Neymar posted a video showing nude photos of a woman who had accused of him of sexual assault. Because of cross-check, the post was left up for more than a day and received more than 100 million views before it was ultimately removed. In its opinion, the board raises questions about why the athlete was not suspended, and pointedly notes that the incident only came to light as a result of Haugen’s disclosures.

“The company ultimately disclosed that the only consequence was content removal, and that the normal penalty would have been account disabling ... Meta later announced it signed an economic deal with Neymar for him to ‘stream games exclusively on Facebook Gaming and share video content to his more than 166 million Instagram fans.’"

The Oversight Board is similarly critical of other “business” factors that play a role in Meta’s cross-check rules. For example, it says Meta skews toward under-enforcement of cross-checked content due to the "perception of censorship" and the effect it could have on the company. “The Board interprets this to mean that, for business reasons, addressing the ‘perception of censorship’ may take priority over other human rights responsibilities relevant for content moderation,” the group writes.

Unsurprisingly, the board had numerous recommendations for Meta on how to improve cross-check. The board says Meta should use “specialized teams independent from political or economic influence, including from Meta’s public policy teams,” to determine which accounts get cross-check protections. It also suggests that there should be a “transparent strike system” to revoke cross-check status from accounts that abuse the company's rules.

The board also recommends that Meta inform all accounts that are part of cross-check, and “publicly mark the pages and accounts of entities receiving list-based protection in the following categories: all state actors and political candidates, all business partners, all media actors, and all other public figures included because of the commercial benefit to the company.” It also wants Meta to track and report key statistics about cross-check accuracy, and take steps to eliminate the backlogs in cases.

In total the Oversight Board came up with 32 detailed recommendations, which Meta will now have 90 days to respond to. As with other policy suggestions from the board, the company isn't obligated to implement any of its suggestions, though it is expected to respond to each one.

Ye is no longer buying Parler, the controversial social media app that’s billed itself as a “free speech” alternative to Twitter. Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, originally struck a deal with Parlement Technologies in October to buy the company for an undisclosed amount.

That deal is now off, according to the company. “Parlement Technologies has confirmed that the company has mutually agreed with Ye to terminate the intent of sale of Parler,” a spokesperson for Parler said in a statement. “This decision was made in the interest of both parties in mid-November. Parler will continue to pursue future opportunities for growth and the evolution of the platform for our vibrant community.”

The spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to questions about why the acquisition was terminated. News of the deal imploding comes just hours after Ye praised Nazis and said, “I like Hitler,” during an appearance on Alex Jones’ podcast.

Ye had first announced he would buy Parler after he was suspended from Twitter following a series of antisemitic tweets. (Twitter CEO Elon Musk later welcomed him back to the platform.) At the time, Parlement technologies CEO George Farmer said that "the proposed acquisition will assure Parler a future role in creating an uncancelable ecosystem where all voices are welcome.”

Elon Musk and Tim Cook have apparently made up following a dustup over the status of Twitter’s iOS app. Musk, who earlier this week, claimed that Apple had “threatened to withhold’ Twitter from the App Store,” said he and Cook had a “good conversation” during a meeting at Apple’s headquarters.

“Among other things, we resolved the misunderstanding about Twitter potentially being removed from the App Store,” Musk wrote. “Tim was clear that Apple never considered doing so.” Musk never said what the original source of Apple’s issue with Twitter’s app was. But Twitter's former head of trust and safety has stated that Apple had flagged various issues during the app review process in the past.

Of note, Musk’s latest tweets don't mention if Cook addressed any of Musk’s other recent complaints. In addition to the App Store issue, Musk had also joined the growing ranks of developers to criticize the App Store’s 30 percent “secret tax” on in-app purchases. Musk reportedly delayed the re-launch of Twitter Blue subscriptions in order to avoid the fees, according to the newsletter Platformer.

Musk had also called out Cook for halting much of Apple’s advertising on Twitter, claiming that the iPhone maker had “mostly stopped” ad campaigns on the platform. The company is currently trying to reassure brands amid a broader pullback in advertising from the platform.

Twitter is now pushing more tweets from accounts users don’t already follow into their timelines. The company revealed that it’s now surfacing recommendations to all its users, even people who had successfully avoided them in the past.

“We want to ensure everyone on Twitter sees the best content on the platform, so we’re expanding recommendations to all users, including those who may not have seen them in the past,” the company wrote in a tweet.

It’s not clear if this means recommendations will begin to appear in the “latest” timeline, which sorts tweets chronologically and has historically not included recommendations, or if Twitter is simply making recommendations more prominent in other parts of the app. In its tweet, the company pointed to a blog post from September, which states that “recommendations can appear in your Home timeline, certain places within the Explore tab, and elsewhere on Twitter.”

Anecdotally, it seems some users are already reportingnoticeablechanges to their timelines, with the appearance of new topic suggestions and many tweets from seemingly random accounts.

Though the change may feel jarring, it’s not the first time the company has experimented with adding more suggested content. Twitter has been pushing recommendations into various parts of its service for years, though it has sometimes tweaked how often these suggestions appear. In the past, Twitter has also been careful to note that it bars certain types of content from recommendations in order to avoid amplifying potentially harmful or low-quality content, though it’s not entirely clear if that’s still the case. The company no longer has a communications team.

Interestingly, Twitter’s current CEO, Elon Musk, hasn’t always spoken favorably about the platform’s recommendation algorithms. Back in May, he tweeted that using the app’s “latest” timeline was crucial to “fix” Twitter’s feed. “You are being manipulated by the algorithm in ways you don’t realize,” he said at the time. Musk, who has also spoken about his desire to open source Twitter’s algorithms, hasn’t yet weighed in on the new expansion of recommendations, or how the feature works.

One month into Elon Musk’s chaotic takeover of Twitter, the company is once again trying to reassure advertisers and users about the direction of the platform. In its first blog post since Musk’s acquisition, the company attempted to explain what “Twitter 2.0” means for the company.

Twitter is right now facing a massive decline in ad revenue as major advertisers have halted spending amid concerns over policy changes instituted by Musk. In the blog post, though, Twitter says that “brand safety is only possible when human safety is the top priority” and that “none of our policies have changed.”

However, it’s difficult to square that claim with the company’s recent confirmation that it will stop enforcing its COVID-19 misinformation rules, and the recent reinstatements of previously banned accounts. “Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach,” the blog post says, without elaborating.

Musk has previously said that “negative” tweets will be “deboosted” and only visible to those searching for them. It’s not clear if these changes have been implemented. Twitter no longer has a communications team.

The blog post also notes that Twitter’s Trust and Safety team “continues its diligent work to keep the platform safe from hateful conduct, abusive behavior, and any violation of Twitter's rules.” The post, signed by “The Twitter Team,” comes one day after the company’s former head of Trust and Safety said the platform is less safe under Musk’s leadership. Yoel Roth, a longtime policy executive at Twitter who had worked closely with Musk in the days immediately following his takeover, said in an interview that Musk ignored warnings from the Trust and Safety team ahead of the disastrous rollout of Twitter Blue’s paid verification.

The blog post is the latest sign of how badly Musk needs to win back Twitter’s advertisers. The company has already lost at least half of its top 100 advertisers, according to a recent report in Media Matters. And newsletter Platformer reported Tuesday that ad revenue is down 15 percent in Europe and the Middle East, in addition to the mounting losses in the US ad market. The Financial Times recently reported that Musk has resorted to personally calling the CEOs of major brands “in order to berate them” for pulling back on ad spending. Musk has also publicly called out Apple CEO Tim Cook for "mostly" halting its advertising on the platform.

Much like Musk's "town hall" with advertisers earlier this month, it's unclear if Twitter's latest statements will be enough reassurance for brands to start spending again. In addition to Musk's chaotic policy changes and the Twitter Blue fiasco, the mass layoffs and resignations have also gutted the teams that typically work closely with ad agencies and brands, which has only further complicated the already strained relationships.