In a significant move that underscores the growing friction between the UK government and global social media giants, Richard Hermer, the Attorney General for England and Wales, has officially ordered his department to stop posting on X. This decision marks the first time a sitting UK government minister has completely abandoned the platform. The move is highly symbolic, signaling a deepening rift in the relationship between the British government and Elon Musk’s social network, which has increasingly come under fire for how it moderates—or fails to moderate—harmful content.
The decision was reportedly prompted by the role the platform played during recent civil unrest in cities like Southampton and Belfast. As the official responsible for upholding the rule of law, Hermer and his office concluded that remaining on a site that allegedly facilitated the organization of racist violence and criminal activity sat at direct odds with their public duty. Essentially, the department determined that using a megaphone that also serves as a catalyst for social discord was no longer tenable for a government office tasked with protecting public safety.
This development creates a complicated dynamic for the Labour government, particularly as Prime Minister Keir Starmer remains active on X. It highlights a widening gap within the administration regarding how to engage with the platform. While the government has previously hinted that a complete ban on X could be on the table if regulators at Ofcom deem it necessary to protect the public, Hermer’s sudden withdrawal suggests that the patience of senior officials is reaching a breaking point. For those on the front lines of law and policy, the platform is no longer seen as a neutral space for discourse.
The tension is exacerbated by the behavior of X’s owner, Elon Musk, who has frequently engaged in inflammatory rhetoric directed at the UK government. By openly aligning himself with far-right political figures and repeatedly calling for the Prime Minister to resign, Musk has effectively transformed the nature of the relationship. Instead of acting as an objective communications platform, X is increasingly viewed by government agencies as a megaphone for extremism, conspiracy theories, and coordinated disinformation that has tangible, dangerous consequences on the streets.
This move by the Attorney General is unlikely to be an isolated incident. It reflects a broader shift in strategy where British officials are no longer willing to tolerate what they perceive as the amplification of real-world harm. By stepping away from the platform, Hermer is casting a vote of no confidence in the site’s current management and its ability to act as a responsible public square. It is a calculated stand that forces a conversation about the responsibilities of social media companies in a democratic society.
Looking ahead, this cooling of relations will likely lead to further regulatory pressure. With the government already launching investigations into X’s AI-driven features like “Grok”—and implementing stricter policies regarding social media use for those under 16—it is clear that the Labour government is prepared to challenge Musk directly. Hermer’s departure may well be the first of many, signaling that the era of government passivity toward tech platforms that allow hate to flourish is rapidly coming to an end.