Back to Headlines
Politics
Jun 17, 2026
Analyzed by Glm 4.7 Flash

X Accused of Granting Racists Impunity Over Racial Slurs Targeting UK Politicians

AI Summary
X (formerly Twitter) has been accused of enabling racists to operate with impunity after refusing to remove dozens of posts containing racial slurs targeting prominent UK politicians, despite repeated reports. The platform only acted when content was flagged as illegal under the UK's Online Safety Act, leaving a significant volume of hate speech untouched.

The Mechanics of Impunity: How X Filters Hate Speech

X has been accused of granting racists operational immunity after refusing to take down dozens of social media posts containing racial slurs targeting prominent UK politicians. Researchers from the thinktank British Future reported that while the platform routinely restricts visibility for content deemed illegal under the UK's Online Safety Act, it largely ignores reports categorized simply as 'hate, abuse or harassment.'

This selective enforcement means that while the platform claims to combat toxicity, it effectively allows users to post slurs like the N-word and P-word without consequence, provided they avoid the specific legal classification required for action.

The Numbers Behind the Silence

  • 30 N-word posts: Researchers reported 30 instances of the N-word being used against Kemi Badenoch in May. X initially restricted visibility for only two of these posts.
  • 33 P-word posts: In a separate report on 15 May, 33 uses of the P-word were targeted at various UK public figures, including Shabana Mahmood and Humza Yousaf. None were removed within the initial 48-hour window.
  • 20 restricted: After intervention by Ofcom, X eventually restricted 20 of the 33 P-word posts within the UK.
  • 13 ignored: Despite the regulatory pressure, 13 of the original P-word posts remained unrestricted.
  • Account suspensions: None of the account holders behind the offensive tweets, including one user who used the N-word 45 times in a week, were suspended.

Regulatory Pressure and the Musk Factor

The situation highlights a critical gap in the UK's regulatory framework. While the Online Safety Act mandates the removal of illegal content, X's policy appears to prioritize legal compliance over general community safety. The platform only acts when posts are explicitly flagged as illegal, a process researchers describe as 'onerous.'

The controversy is further complicated by the influence of Elon Musk, who has used X to amplify far-right narratives since acquiring the platform. Keir Starmer has previously accused Musk of attempting to 'whip up division' regarding the murder of student Henry Nowak. The surge in racist abuse against politicians like Badenoch following political speeches suggests a direct link between online far-right sentiment and the volume of hate speech on the platform.

The Future of Online Safety in the UK

With Ofcom announcing quarterly reviews of X's performance and a commitment to review suspected illegal content within 24 hours, the platform faces increasing scrutiny. However, the current data suggests that without stricter enforcement of general hate policies, the platform will continue to struggle to meet its safety obligations. The 'impunity' granted to users currently undermines the effectiveness of the Online Safety Act, potentially leading to further regulatory intervention and legal challenges for X.