EU launches new investigation into X over sexual deepfakes 

The European Fee has launched a brand new formal investigation towards social media platform X beneath the Digital Companies Act (DSA) over sexual deepfakes.

That is in line with a press release printed on the European Fee’s web site.

The transfer comes amid issues that Grok was used to generate non-consensual sexually specific pictures, prompting investigations and regulatory actions in different nations just like the UK, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

What the Fee stated 

In response to the European Fee, the new investigation will assess whether or not X correctly assessed and mitigated dangers associated to the dissemination of unlawful content material within the EU, resembling manipulated sexually specific pictures, together with content material that will quantity to youngster sexual abuse materials.

The EU disclosed that these dangers appear to have materialised, exposing residents within the EU to severe hurt.

“In mild of this, the Fee will additional examine whether or not X complies with its DSA obligations to: 

“Diligently assess and mitigate systemic dangers, together with the dissemination of unlawful content material, adverse results in relation to gender-based violence, and severe adverse penalties to bodily and psychological well-being stemming from deployments of Grok’s functionalities into its platform. 

“Conduct and transmit to the Fee an advert hoc danger evaluation report for Grok’s functionalities within the X service with a essential impression on X’s danger profile previous to their deployment,” they acknowledged

Henna Virkkunen, Govt Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Safety and Democracy stated that permitting dangerous sexual deepfakes is an unacceptable type of degradation

“Sexual deepfakes of girls and kids are a violent, unacceptable type of degradation. With this investigation, we are going to decide whether or not X has met its authorized obligations beneath the DSA, or whether or not it handled rights of European residents – together with these of girls and kids – as collateral injury of its service.” 

Extra particulars 

The Fee added that X should additionally conduct and submit an advert hoc danger evaluation report for Grok’s functionalities that might have a essential impression on the platform’s danger profile previous to deployment.

• If X is discovered to have failed in these obligations, it will represent infringements of Articles 34(1) and (2), 35(1), and 42(2) of the DSA.
• Individually, the continued investigation from December 2023 has been prolonged to look at whether or not X has adequately assessed and mitigated systemic dangers related to its recommender techniques, together with the platform’s current swap to a Grok-based recommender system.

Backstory 

The prolonged December 2023 investigation builds on formal proceedings the European Fee opened, which assessed whether or not X had complied with the Digital Companies Act (DSA) in key areas, together with content material moderation, danger administration, misleading design, promoting transparency, and entry for unbiased researchers.

• The December 2023 probe relied on X’s danger evaluation report, its Transparency Report, and responses to formal info requests, together with content material associated to Hamas’ assaults towards Israel.
• These proceedings had been the primary formal enforcement beneath the DSA and adopted X’s designation as a Very Giant On-line Platform (VLOP) on 25 April 2023, with 112 million month-to-month EU customers.

What it’s best to know 

On 5 December 2025, the Fee fined X €120 million for non-compliance associated to misleading design, lack of promoting transparency, and restricted knowledge entry for researchers.

Regulators highlighted three principal violations:

• X’s paid blue checkmark system, which allowed customers to purchase verification with out correct id checks, deceptive the public and growing publicity to scams.
• Promoting transparency breaches, together with lacking info on sponsors and goal audiences, design limitations, and lengthy processing delays that hindered researchers’ capacity to trace disinformation.
• Restricted entry for unbiased researchers to public knowledge, limiting scrutiny of systemic dangers resembling misinformation and unlawful content material, a key DSA requirement.