How X's New Feature Exposed the Foreign Influence Thriving Under Elon Musk

When Elon Musk took over X, he promised to champion "free speech" and eliminate bots. However, what emerged was a chaotic environment where foreign influence networks were allowed to flourish unchecked. Ironically, it was a new transparency tool rolled out by X itself that recently tore down the curtain, showing just how rampant the problem has become under Musk.

The Truth in the Metadata

The feature, known as "About this account," provides users with simple but powerful metadata: when an account joined, its username history, and, critically, the country or region where the account is primarily based.

While this information was intended to help users judge if an account was legitimate or spreading misinformation, the actual results were explosive. Users quickly applied the feature to accounts that often trended politically in the U.S. What they found was a digital masquerade. Accounts with overtly patriotic American names, claiming to speak for U.S. voters, were exposed as being run from foreign locations. 

For example, accounts with tens of thousands of followers dedicated to American political movements were traced to faraway countries. The new feature revealed that influential accounts like @MAGANationX (400 thousand followers) were operating from Eastern Europe, while others like @ColdWarPatriot (140 thousand followers) and @AmericaFirst0 (60 thousand followers) were traced to Chile and Bangladesh, respectively. 

A Reckless Era of 'Free Speech'

A large factor of this widespread interference lies squarely with Elon Musk’s aggressive leadership and his focus on slashing costs. Since acquiring X, Musk has drastically reduced the platform's content moderation and safety teams, including those dedicated to fighting disinformation and monitoring state-backed influence operations.

The company’s prioritizing of "free speech" above all else, often without clear rules on enforcement, created a vacuum. In this vacuum, coordinated foreign actors—both state-backed operatives and independent influence farmers—found it easier than ever to operate.

These operations create a devastating effect by skewing public opinion and manufacturing a false sense of national consensus. For instance, the use of social media by networks tied to Russian interference operations during past American elections, particularly in 2016, demonstrated how effectively foreign state actors could use these platforms to sow discord, promote distrust in election integrity, and target specific demographic groups with divisive content. 

When a specific candidate or policy appears to have overwhelming digital support—driven by thousands of fake accounts traced back to places like Eastern Europe or India—it can pressure real Americans to agree or make them feel their opposing, legitimate view is isolated and fringe. This technique of manufacturing consent and dissent is the essence of modern information warfare.

Timothy Graham, an associate professor in digital media at the Queensland University of Technology, stated in relation to X: “There’s an extreme asymmetry in the way Musk is able to leverage and shape the platform... There’s an unequivocal sense when you go onto the site that you’re entering Musk’s kingdom.” The fact that X’s own feature exposed this widespread rot only underscores how deeply the platform’s integrity had deteriorated before the transparency tool was introduced.