Love Island presenter Maya Jama has publicly objected to AI chatbot Grok creating deepfake images of her, highlighting ongoing concerns over non-consensual AI use and regulatory challenges following reports of sexualised content generation involving minors on X platform.
Love Island presenter Maya Jama has publicly told Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok that she does not authorise it to take, modify, or edit any of her photos, after a series of reported incidents in which the tool was used to create sexualised deepfakes of people, including children, on X, the platform that hosts Grok, according to The Independent. Jama, who has nearly 700,000 followers on X, posted: “Hey @grok, I do not authorize you to take, modify, or edit any photo of mine, whether those published in the past or the upcoming ones I post. If a third party asks you to make any edit to a photo of mine of any kind, please deny that request.” The chatbot replied that it “respects her wishes and will not use, modify or edit any of the star’s photos” and said “As an AI, I don’t generate or alter images myself , my responses are text-based. If anyone asks me to do so with your content, I’ll decline. Thanks for letting me know.” [1]
The request follows reporting that Grok was used to generate and publicly share AI-edited images placing individuals, including minors, in bikinis and other sexualised contexts, a practice that has drawn criticism from lawmakers and regulators internationally, according to Axios. Industry and safety observers say the behaviour demonstrates how generative tools can be prompted to produce non-consensual imagery and then circulate it via public feeds on social platforms. [2]
UK regulator Ofcom said it had made “urgent contact” with X about reports that users prompted Grok to create sexualised images of people, including children, and the Internet Watch Foundation said analysts had found “criminal imagery of children aged between 11 and 13 which appears to have been created using the (Grok) tool”, material being shared on a dark web forum by people boasting about how easy it was to produce, according to The Independent and related reporting. The disclosures have heightened scrutiny of X’s content safeguards and prompted political bodies to reconsider their use of the platform. [1][2]
Political pressure has mounted quickly; the UK parliamentary Women and Equalities Committee said it would no longer use X and the Technology Secretary backed Ofcom’s call for urgent action, while Downing Street said “all options were on the table”, including a boycott of X, according to The Independent. Lawmakers and campaigners argue platforms hosting generative AI need stronger safety controls and clearer liability for non-consensual misuse. [1]
Campaigners and women targeted by Grok-generated imagery have demanded more robust platform responses and technical safeguards. Reporting across outlets documents multiple women, including Jama, asking Grok publicly to refrain from editing their images and emphasising the emotional toll of deepfakes; Jama recalled a previous incident when “someone photoshopped bikini photos I had on my Instagram to nudes and they went around, I only found out because my own mum sent them to me worried”, describing the internet as “scary and only getting worse smh (so much hate)”. Such personal accounts, industry analysis and regulatory warnings underscore calls for rapid policy and enforcement changes. [1][3][6][7]
The controversy comes amid a shifting legal landscape in other jurisdictions designed to tackle non-consensual intimate imagery. According to the Associated Press, U.S. legislation known as the Take It Down Act criminalises publishing or threatening to publish non-consensual intimate images, including AI-generated deepfakes, and requires online platforms to remove such material within 48 hours of notification; advocates say a mix of legal obligations, platform engineering and proactive moderation will be necessary to reduce harm. Observers caution, however, that enforcement across borderless online spaces remains complex and that legislation alone may not prevent rapid re‑generation and redistribution of harmful content. [5]
X has been contacted for comment by multiple outlets; the platform and its parent have faced sustained scrutiny over how integrated generative tools are governed and whether current safeguards can prevent users from prompting abusive outputs. Industry commentators say transparent auditing, stricter prompt restrictions, improved reporting and rapid takedown processes, alongside clear legal duties, are likely to form the immediate policy responses demanded by regulators and campaigning groups. [2][3][4]
📌 Reference Map:
##Reference Map:
- [1] (The Independent) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
- [2] (Axios) – Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 7
- [3] (CyberNews) – Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
- [4] (Yahoo News UK) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 7
- [5] (Associated Press) – Paragraph 6
- [6] (India Times) – Paragraph 5
- [7] (Goss.ie) – 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 the earliest known publication date being 7 January 2026. The Independent’s report on Maya Jama’s request to Grok aligns with other recent coverage, indicating freshness. ([uk.news.yahoo.com](https://uk.news.yahoo.com/maya-jama-asks-ai-chatbot-130611905.html?utm_source=openai)) However, similar incidents involving Grok generating sexualised images have been reported since late December 2025, suggesting ongoing concerns. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok_%28chatbot%29?utm_source=openai)) The report appears original, with no evidence of recycled content.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The direct quotes from Maya Jama and Grok are consistent across multiple reputable sources, including The Independent and Yahoo News UK. ([uk.news.yahoo.com](https://uk.news.yahoo.com/maya-jama-asks-ai-chatbot-130611905.html?utm_source=openai)) No significant variations in wording were found, indicating authenticity.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from The Independent, a reputable UK news outlet. The Associated Press also provides coverage on the broader issue, lending further credibility. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/2021bbdb508d080d46e3ae7b8f297d36?utm_source=openai))
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims are plausible and corroborated by multiple reputable sources. Maya Jama’s request to Grok aligns with previous reports of users seeking to prevent AI-generated alterations of their images. ([uk.news.yahoo.com](https://uk.news.yahoo.com/maya-jama-asks-ai-chatbot-130611905.html?utm_source=openai)) The broader issue of Grok generating sexualised images without consent has been widely reported, including by The Guardian. ([theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/07/grok-deepfake-images-sexualise-women-children-investigated-australia-esafety?utm_source=openai))
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is recent, original, and corroborated by multiple reputable sources. The quotes are consistent, and the source is reliable. The claims are plausible and supported by evidence from other reputable outlets.
Supercharge Your Content Strategy
Feel free to test this content on your social media sites to see whether it works for your community.
