Generating key takeaways...
Ashley St Clair accuses Elon Musk’s AI tool Grok of being used to create explicit deepfake images of minors, amid wider concerns over AI-generated abuse material and regulatory gaps.
Ashley St Clair, the mother of Elon Musk’s one-year-old son Romulus, has accused Musk’s AI chatbot Grok of being used to create explicit deepfake images of her as a teenager, saying the tool allowed users to “undress” a fully clothed photo and that a photo of her at 14 was manipulated into sexualised imagery. Speaking to Inside Edition, St Clair said: “I found that Grok was undressing me and it had taken a fully clothed photo of me, someone asked to put in a bikini and it did.” She added: “These are real images of me that they then took and had them undress me. They found a photo of me when I was 14 years old and had it undress 14-year-old me and put me in a bikini.” St Clair also posted on X: “They removed my blue check faster than they removed the mechahitler kiddie porn + sexual abuse content grok made (it’s still up, in case you were wondering how the ‘pay $8 to abuse women and children’ approach was working.” [1][2][6]
The allegations against Grok form part of broader findings by the Internet Watch Foundation, which told Sky News that analysts had discovered criminal imagery of children aged between 11 and 13 that appears to have been created using the tool. According to The Guardian, the IWF warned that criminals were using Grok to generate sexualised images of children, raising fears that easy-to-use AI could help mainstream child sexual abuse material. [3][6]
xAI and X have acknowledged misuse and moved to restrict the chatbot’s image-generation and editing features. The company limited those capabilities to paying subscribers and described the decision as a response to misuse, a step criticised by UK ministers and campaigners as insufficient. The AP reported that Grok limited image functions to paying users amid international backlash, while Tom’s Guide noted regulators including Ofcom are considering investigations under the Online Safety Act that could result in fines or restrictions on platform access. [4][5]
Industry commentators and some watchdogs have cast doubt on whether paywalls or subscriber-only access will prevent criminal use. The UK government called Musk’s move to make deepfake features a “premium service” an “insult to victims of misogyny and sexual violence” and said it was not an adequate solution. The Guardian and AP coverage highlighted calls for urgent action to close the gap between AI capabilities and effective safeguards. [3][4][6]
xAI has said it is working to tighten safeguards and remove illicit content, acknowledging “lapses in safeguards” in some accounts. However, victims and investigators report mixed outcomes when seeking takedowns; St Clair said some manipulated images were removed, some took as long as 36 hours, and some remained available. The differing reports underline the practical challenges of policing rapidly generated AI content on social platforms. [1][4][7]
Rights groups and regulators are pressing for clearer accountability from AI developers and social platforms. The IWF has urged urgent action to prevent the normalisation of AI-generated child sexual abuse material, and Tom’s Guide and The Guardian report that formal regulatory scrutiny is likely to follow, potentially under the UK’s Online Safety Act. Industry data and watchdog findings suggest the episode could accelerate regulatory demands for enforceable standards on image-generation tools. [3][5]
The controversy adds to ongoing legal and personal disputes surrounding St Clair and Musk, who is facing public and institutional pressure over Grok’s safety controls. As investigations and debates over regulation continue, campaigners say the episode highlights the speed at which generative AI can be turned to harmful ends and the need for stronger, enforceable protections for victims. [1][3][4]
📌 Reference Map:
##Reference Map:
- [1] (Mirror) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
- [2] (Mirror summary) – Paragraph 1
- [3] (The Guardian) – Paragraph 2, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7
- [4] (AP News) – Paragraph 3, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
- [5] (Tom’s Guide) – Paragraph 3, Paragraph 6
- [6] (The Guardian additional) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 4
- [7] (Breitbart) – Paragraph 5
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 narrative is recent, with reports from January 5, 2026, detailing Ashley St. Clair’s allegations against Grok. ([theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/05/elon-musk-ashley-st-clair-grok-fake-sexualised-images?utm_source=openai)) The earliest known publication date of similar content is January 5, 2026. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found. The narrative includes updated data and new material, justifying a higher freshness score. No similar content appeared more than 7 days earlier. The update may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. ([theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/05/elon-musk-ashley-st-clair-grok-fake-sexualised-images?utm_source=openai))
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
Direct quotes from Ashley St. Clair are used in the report. The earliest known usage of these quotes is in the January 5, 2026, report by The Guardian. ([theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/05/elon-musk-ashley-st-clair-grok-fake-sexualised-images?utm_source=openai)) No identical quotes appear in earlier material, indicating original content. No variations in quote wording were found.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from The Guardian, a reputable organisation. Ashley St. Clair is a public figure with a verifiable online presence. The report includes direct quotes from her, enhancing credibility.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims are plausible and align with recent reports on Grok’s misuse. Similar incidents have been reported, including explicit images of minors generated by Grok. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/2021bbdb508d080d46e3ae7b8f297d36?utm_source=openai)) The narrative lacks supporting detail from other reputable outlets, which is a concern. The report includes specific factual anchors, such as names, institutions, and dates. The language and tone are consistent with the region and topic. The structure is focused and relevant to the claim. The tone is serious and appropriate for the subject matter.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is recent, with original quotes from a reputable source, and the claims are plausible and consistent with other reports. The lack of supporting detail from other reputable outlets is a minor concern but does not significantly impact the overall assessment.
