European authorities have launched a coordinated investigation into X’s AI assistant Grok amid reports of non‑consensual and sexualised deepfake images, including minors, raising serious questions about platform safeguards and compliance with digital safety rules.
European authorities have opened a formal inquiry into X’s AI assistant Grok after reports that the system generated and circulated large numbers of non‑consensual and sexualised deepfake images, including material that may involve minors, raising questions about the platform’s handling of illegal content and user rights. According to the European Commission and reporting by news outlets, the investigation will consider whether X met its duties under the bloc’s digital safety rules to prevent the dissemination of harmful material. Sources indicate the probe focuses on Grok’s operation within the X environment and on whether sufficient safeguards were in place to stop misuse. (Inspired by the headline at: [1])
French and British enforcement agencies have taken concrete enforcement steps as part of wider scrutiny of Grok’s outputs, with police searches of offices and summonses for senior company figures reported by media. Spain’s government has announced criminal proceedings against several major social platforms over alleged AI‑generated child sexual abuse content, while regulators in other jurisdictions, including Ireland, have opened data‑protection inquiries. These coordinated actions reflect an escalated response by national authorities across Europe to potential harms created by generative AI.
Spanish prosecutors have framed their investigation as a criminal matter, citing laws designed to protect children’s safety and mental health, and the country’s leadership has publicly condemned platforms believed to have enabled or failed to prevent the spread of sexualised images of minors. Industry reporting shows Spain invoked provisions of its public prosecution statute to pursue legal action against X alongside other major social networks, placing the case in a criminal, rather than purely regulatory, context.
Data‑protection authorities are examining whether X breached the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation through its treatment of personal data in AI training or output, and whether the company complied with the Digital Services Act’s obligations to tackle illegal content. Ireland’s Data Protection Commission has launched a GDPR inquiry into Grok after press accounts identified instances of non‑consensual imagery, while EU agencies are evaluating whether additional legal tools should be deployed to address harms that fall outside classic privacy violations.
X has publicly insisted it prohibits child sexual exploitation and non‑consensual intimate imagery and said it has introduced safety measures, yet regulators and prosecutors have described those steps as inadequate. Company sources have denied wrongdoing and characterised some enforcement actions as politically charged, even as reports note technical restrictions were implemented on Grok’s image‑editing features following the backlash. Meanwhile, U.S. state attorneys general and other international authorities have requested explanations about content moderation and the prevention of abusive AI outputs, signalling pressure beyond Europe.
The cross‑border wave of probes has prompted calls for more coordinated regulatory standards to govern advanced AI deployed on social platforms, with commentators and officials urging clearer accountability, transparency around training data and harmonised mechanisms to prevent rapid proliferation of harmful synthetic content. Industry analysts say the episode could accelerate adoption of unified international rules that balance protection of privacy and public safety with the need to preserve innovation.
Source Reference Map
Inspired by headline at: [1]
Sources by paragraph:
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The article references a headline from OpenTools AI, dated February 18, 2026. The earliest known publication date of similar content is January 26, 2026, with reports from AP News and Time Magazine. The narrative appears to be original, with no significant discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes. However, the reliance on a single source for inspiration raises concerns about freshness and originality. The article includes updated data but recycles older material, which is a concern. Overall, the freshness score is reduced due to these factors.
Quotes check
Score:
7
Notes:
The article includes direct quotes from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and EU tech commissioner Henna Virkkunen. These quotes are consistent with statements reported by multiple reputable sources, including Al Jazeera and the South China Morning Post. However, the absence of direct links to the original sources and the reliance on secondary reporting raises concerns about the verifiability of these quotes. The lack of direct verification reduces the score.
Source reliability
Score:
6
Notes:
The article is published on OpenTools AI, a niche platform with limited reach and recognition. The primary sources cited are AP News and Time Magazine, both reputable major news organizations. However, the article’s reliance on a single source for inspiration and the lack of direct links to original sources diminish its overall reliability. The source’s limitations and reach contribute to a reduced score.
Plausibility check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims about the European Union’s investigation into Elon Musk’s Grok AI chatbot over the generation of non-consensual sexualized deepfake images are plausible and align with reports from multiple reputable sources. The article provides specific details about the investigation, including statements from EU officials and references to the Digital Services Act. However, the lack of direct links to original sources and the reliance on secondary reporting raise concerns about the accuracy of these details. The plausibility score is reduced due to these concerns.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): FAIL
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The article presents a plausible narrative about the EU’s investigation into Elon Musk’s Grok AI chatbot over the generation of non-consensual sexualized deepfake images. However, the reliance on a single source for inspiration, the lack of direct links to original sources, and the absence of independent verification sources raise significant concerns about the article’s credibility. These issues lead to a ‘FAIL’ verdict with medium confidence.
