Why I’m stepping away from X

Jan 11
3 min read

For a long time, I have stayed on X because that’s where the conversation was. Where people got their news. Where constituents asked me questions. Where politicians were expected to show up.

But there comes a point where staying silent, or staying put, becomes complicity.

That point has now been reached.

This week, Ofcom confirmed it has launched an investigation into X after deeply disturbing reports that its AI chatbot, Grok, is being used to create non-consensual, sexualised deepfake images of women and children. These are not abstract risks or hypothetical harms. This is intimate image abuse. This is the sexual exploitation of children. And it is happening right now.

Let’s be clear about what this means.

If any other platform were found to be generating and distributing sexual abuse material at this scale, the response would be immediate. Police action. Warrants. Doors being knocked on. No hesitation.

Yet X continues to operate as if it is somehow exempt, shielded by scale, by power, or by the personal brand of its owner.

That cannot be allowed to stand.

Why “wait and see” is not good enough

The UK’s Online Safety Act was passed for moments exactly like this. Parliament gave Ofcom real enforcement powers to protect people from illegal and harmful content. Especially women. Especially children.

And yet, once again, we are being told to wait.

Wait for assurances.Wait for internal fixes.Wait for platforms to do the right thing.

We cannot stand by and wait for someone like Elon Musk to do the right thing while real people are being abused and exploited as we speak.

The Liberal Democrats are right to call for the National Crime Agency to launch an urgent criminal investigation into X’s UK operations. If criminal offences are being committed, and all the evidence suggests they may be, then this must be treated as a matter for law enforcement, not corporate promises.

But even that is not enough on its own.

While investigations are ongoing, access to X should be restricted in the UK. The safety of women and children must always come before the profits of social media giants.

Why this matters beyond one platform

This isn’t just about X.

It’s about whether we are serious as a country about protecting people from digital abuse, or whether we allow powerful tech firms to drag their feet while harm continues unchecked.

AI tools are moving fast. Faster than regulation. Faster than safeguards. Faster than our ability to clean up the damage once it’s done.

If we do not draw a clear line now, we are sending a dangerous message: that exploitation is tolerated until it becomes inconvenient.

So why leave X?

For me, this comes down to values.

I cannot continue to actively use a platform that is under investigation for enabling the creation and spread of sexual abuse material, particularly involving children, while meaningful action is delayed. As a father to young children, I cannot stand by.

That does not mean disengaging from public debate. It does not mean retreating from difficult conversations. It means choosing not to legitimise a platform that has repeatedly failed to put safety before profit.

Some will argue that politicians should stay on X to challenge misinformation and reach audiences who are still there. I understand that argument, and individual MPs will make their own decisions.

We must be honest with ourselves: if X does not clean up its act, and if regulators do not act decisively, then staying becomes impossible to justify.