Tag Archives: LGBT+ representation

Mathew on Monday: why X must be held to account over Grok

I was on GB News early this morning, setting out why I agree with Ed Davey that X should be suspended, pending an investigation into Grok.

Some readers may not relish the idea of me appearing on GB News. It is a channel many liberals feel uncomfortable with, and not without reason, but liberal voices simply cannot afford to be absent from platforms we find awkward, or from debates where the loudest contributions too often go unchallenged. If we genuinely believe in open argument, democratic accountability, and the contest of ideas, which I hope we do, then we have to be prepared to show up-not just where it is easy to do so, but where it is difficult.

That is why I’m grateful to have appeared on The Late Show Live with Ben Leo a little after midnight, debating with the IEA’s Reem Ibrahim to make the calm, liberal case for why X should indeed be temporarily suspended until it gets its house in order over Grok.

Predictably, the response from some was to cry “censorship” and invoke “free speech” as though it were an absolute trump card.

But liberalism is not libertarianism and has never meant free speech without responsibility. Free expression does not exist in a vacuum. It sits alongside other liberal values: consent, dignity, accountability, and the rule of law. When powerful actors ignore these values, it is not illiberal to respond – it is necessary.

At the heart of the current controversy is Grok, X’s AI system, and the way it has been rolled out without adequate safeguards, transparency, or ethical restraint. This is not about being hostile to technology. Liberalism does not fear innovation. But it does insist that power – whether political, corporate, or technological – is exercised responsibly and is subject to scrutiny.

What makes the Grok issue particularly disturbing is what it allows in practice. Users are able to generate/change/distort images of real people (of all ages) without any meaningful form of consent from those being depicted. These images can be misleading, degrading, or sexualised. This is not a hypothetical concern or a fringe misuse. It is exploitation, plain and simple-the digital appropriation of people’s likenesses without their permission, control, or recourse.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 3 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Simon Robinson
    As far as I can tell from the DNS records, the entire family of sites has only existed for just over a month - since 17 September 2026. The LibDem one is puzzl...
  • Julian Tisi
    This is the first time in a while that I have been on LibDem Voice; I wish more people saw this article because IMO it speaks to exactly what we need to do and ...
  • Peter Davies
    After the Norman conquest, the majority of the English were forced into serfdom. The descendents of the Normans are still significantly richer than the descenda...
  • Peter Davies
    The levels probably reflect the fact that they don't currently have any MPs but the direction is right. I wouldn't call it centrist though....
  • Richard Cripps
    In the discussion about reparations - an irrational notion for all the reasons mentioned - no one seems to mention that there are more slaves/trafficked people ...