X (formerly Twitter), under Elon Musk, presents a user agreement filled with contradictions and pitfalls that could leave users exposed to privacy risks and financial uncertainty. Elon Musk’s platform prohibits external data scraping while reserving the right to use your data for internal AI training—specifically for Musk’s xAI project. This double standard benefits the platform at the expense of user privacy and raises concerns about transparency and fairness.
The Contradictions in Data Usage
X’s updated Terms of Service, effective September 29, 2023, bans external entities from scraping data, seemingly to protect users from privacy violations. However, X itself is free to use that same data for its own machine learning and AI development purposes, making its claim of protecting users feel hollow. The platform actively harvests user interactions, posts, and data, without the same scrutiny or limitations imposed on third-party companies.
This practice leaves users vulnerable, as the details about what data is collected and how it’s used remain vague. The user agreement allows X to freely exploit its own user base while restricting outside access—an unfair and potentially misleading dynamic.
The Monetization Dilemma
For content creators, X offers an opportunity to monetize through ad revenue sharing, but this model also reveals serious flaws. To be eligible, creators must have at least 500 followers and accumulate 5 million impressions over a three-month period. Even if a creator meets these criteria, the monetization process is far from straightforward. X controls the distribution of ad revenue, and creators are subject to shifting requirements, making it difficult to secure consistent earnings.
Let’s break down a scenario to illustrate how this works. If a creator generates 10 million impressions in a three-month period, and X offers $5 per 1,000 impressions, the potential earnings would be:
- 10,000,000 impressions ÷ 1,000 = 10,000 units
- 10,000 units × $5 = $50,000 total
However, X takes a significant cut—up to 50%—leaving the creator with:
- $50,000 × 0.5 = $25,000.
While this may seem like a good deal for top creators, it’s less appealing for smaller creators who may barely meet the eligibility threshold. Many smaller creators struggle to maintain engagement and receive inconsistent payments, making it nearly impossible to rely on X as a stable income source. Additionally, X’s algorithm and policies often change, which could result in a sudden drop in visibility or monetization eligibility, further complicating a creator’s efforts to earn.
Financial Figures and Fairness
At first glance, these figures might seem fair to some, but they reveal a deeper problem in X’s monetization system. The platform disproportionately rewards creators who already have large followings, while smaller creators put in similar levels of effort but receive much smaller payouts. The revenue-sharing model doesn’t align with the actual value these creators bring to the platform, as X generates substantial revenue from advertising based on user engagement but shares only a fraction of that income with the creators themselves.
Even creators who hit impressive milestones may feel the pressure of constantly changing metrics. The monetization process is unpredictable and doesn’t offer long-term financial security. While some top creators report earnings upwards of $20,000 per month, the average smaller creator might only see between $100 and $2,000, depending on their engagement levels. This inequality can lead creators to feel undervalued and exploited by the very platform that profits from their content.
The Legal Angle: Risks of Being Sued by X
Another major concern is X’s legal position. The platform’s user agreement grants X broad legal protections, meaning creators or users can face legal action for violating the platform’s rules. Potential reasons for a lawsuit could include:
- Breach of Agreement: Engaging in activities like unauthorized data scraping, which could result in legal action.
- Defamation: Making false or harmful statements about X or Musk that could damage the platform’s reputation.
- Intellectual Property Violations: Using copyrighted content or trademarks improperly.
X’s user agreement is designed to protect the platform and gives it significant power over users and creators. This includes enforcing legal action in cases where the terms of service are violated. Given these broad protections, it’s clear that X retains the upper hand in any legal disputes, further highlighting the risks of engaging deeply with the platform.
The Power of Creators: Keeping the Platforms Running
Both Facebook and X rely heavily on creators to keep their platforms vibrant and engaging. Creators are the ones consistently producing content that drives user interaction, whether it’s through posts, videos, or live streams. While the platforms benefit from advertising and data collection, it’s the creators who keep people coming back for more. Their content generates the views, clicks, and engagement that fuel the platforms’ ad revenue.
The monetization models on these platforms are applied individually to each creator. A creator’s earnings are based on their view counts, engagement levels, and eligibility. For example, on Facebook, creators receive 55% of the ad revenue, while the platform keeps 45%. On X, the platform takes up to 50%, with each creator’s revenue split according to their individual performance. Despite this unequal distribution, creators are the ones who keep these platforms running. They generate the content that attracts users and drives both engagement and ad revenue, making creators the true backbone of these platforms.
Yet, while creators are crucial, the platforms often place their own interests above those of the very people creating the content. This imbalance shows the dependency platforms have on creators, while simultaneously not compensating them fairly in many cases.
Conclusion: The Risk of Being Exploited by X
X’s user agreement and monetization system present significant contradictions and risks. The platform’s ban on data scraping doesn’t protect users when X itself is allowed to use their data for AI development. This creates a double standard that leaves users’ privacy at risk while benefiting Musk’s broader ventures. Similarly, X’s monetization model appears enticing on the surface but leaves many creators struggling with inconsistent payments, shifting eligibility requirements, and an unfair revenue-sharing split.
Ultimately, the platform prioritizes its own interests over those of its users, leaving both content creators and casual users vulnerable to being “screwed” by X—both financially and potentially legally.
“Well, we were right about this after all.”
Sponsored • TRJ Ads
Inquiries: contact@therealistjuggernaut.com
