Controversy over the chatbot Grok escalated rapidly through the early weeks of 2026. The cause was revelations about its alleged ability to generate sexualised images of women and children in response to requests from users on the social media platform X.

This prompted the UK media regulator Ofcom and, subsequently, the European Commission, to launch formal investigations. These developments come at a pivotal moment for digital regulation in the UK and the EU. Governments are moving from aspirational regulatory frameworks to a new phase of active enforcement, particularly with legislation such as the UK’s Online Safety Act.

The central question here is not whether individual failures by social media companies occur, but whether voluntary safeguards – those devised by the social media companies rather than enforced by a regulator – remain sufficient where the risks are foreseeable. These safeguards can include such measures as blocking certain keywords in the user prompts to AI chatbots, for example.

Grok is a test case because of the integration of the AI produced within the X social media platform. X (formerly Twitter) has had longstanding challenges around content moderation, political polarisation and harassment.

Unlike standalone AI tools, Grok operates inside a high velocity social media environment. Controversial responses to user requests can be instantly amplified, stripped of context and repurposed for mass circulation.

In response to the concerns about Grok, X issued a statement saying the company would “continue to have zero tolerance for any forms of child sexual exploitation, non-consensual nudity, and unwanted sexual content”.

The statement added that image creation and the ability to edit images would now only be available to paid subscribers globally. Furthermore, X said it was “working round the clock” to apply additional safeguards and take down problematic and illegal content.

This last assurance – of building in additional safeguards – echoes earlier platform responses to extremist content, sexual abuse material and misinformation. That framing, however, is increasingly being rejected by regulators.

Under the UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA), the EU’s AI Act and codes of practice and the EU Digital Services Act (DSA), platforms are legally required to identify, assess and mitigate foreseeable risks arising from the design and operation of their services.

These obligations extend beyond illegal content. They include harms associated with political polarisation, radicalisation, misinformation and sexualised abuse.

Step by step

Research on online radicalisation and persuasive technologies has long emphasised that harm often emerges cumulatively, through repeated validation, normalisation and adaptive engagement rather than through isolated exposure. It is possible that AI systems like Grok could intensify this dynamic.

In the general sense, there is potential for conversational systems to legitimise false premises, reinforce grievances and adapt responses to users’ ideological or emotional cues.

The risk is not simply that misinformation exists, but that AI systems may materially increase its credibility, durability or reach. Regulators must therefore assess not only individual results from AI, but whether the AI system itself enables escalation, reinforcement or the persistence of harmful interactions over time.

Safeguards used on social media with regard to AI-generated content can include the screening of user prompts, blocking certain keywords and moderating posts. Such measures used alone may be insufficient if the overall social media platform continues to amplify false or polarising narratives indirectly.

Generative AI alters the enforcement landscape in important ways. Unlike static feeds, conversational AI systems may engage users privately and repeatedly. This makes harm less visible, harder to find evidence for and more difficult to audit using tools designed for posts, shares or recommendations. This poses new challenges for regulators aiming to measure exposure, reinforcement or escalation over time.

These challenges are compounded by practical enforcement constraints, including limited regulator access to interaction logs.

Grok operates in an environment where AI tools can generate sexualised content and deepfakes without consent. In general, women are disproportionately targeted in terms of sexualised content, and the resulting harms are severe and enduring.

These harms frequently intersect with misogyny, extremist narratives and
coordinated misinformation, illustrating the limits of siloed risk assessments that
separate sexual abuse from radicalisation and information integrity.

Ofcom and the European Commission now have the authority not only to impose fines, but to mandate operational changes and restrict services under the OSA, DSA and AI Act.

Grok has become an early test of whether these powers will be used to address
large-scale risks, rather than simply failures to remove content. narrow content takedown failures.

Enforcement, however, cannot stop at national borders. Platforms such as Grok operate globally, while regulatory standards and oversight mechanisms remain fragmented. OECD guidance has already underscored the need for common approaches, particularly for AI systems with significant societal impact.

Some convergence is now beginning to emerge through industry-led safety frameworks such as the one initiated by Open AI, and Anthropic’s articulated risk tiers for advanced models. It is also emerging through the EU AI Act’s classification of high-risk systems and development of voluntary codes of practice.

Grok is not merely a technical glitch, nor just another chatbot controversy. It raises a fundamental question about whether platforms can credibly self-govern where the risks are foreseeable. It also questions whether governments can meaningfully enforce laws designed to protect users, democratic processes and the integrity of information in a fragmented, cross-border digital ecosystem.

The outcome will indicate whether generative AI will be subject to real accountability in practice, or whether it will repeat the cycle of harm, denial and delayed enforcement that we have seen from other social media platforms.

Jacqueline Lesley Ormes, aged 72, sadly passed away at home at Lyngate Private Rest Home on Wigan Road, Bolton.

Her death, which occurred on February 12, is not being treated as suspicious.

A Greater Manchester Police spokesperson said: “We are appealing for the public’s help to trace family of a woman from Bolton.

“Jacqueline Lesley Ormes, 72, sadly passed away at home at Lyngate Private Rest Home on Wigan Road, Bolton on 12/02/2026.

“There are believed to be no suspicious circumstances surrounding her death.

“Any info? Contact the Police Coroner’s Office in Bolton on 0161 856 4687.”

Police have not been able to identify any next of kin and are appealing to the public for information.

Anyone who may be able to help is asked to contact the Police Coroner’s Office in Bolton on 0161 856 4687.

Police searches at Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s former home of Royal Lodge, in Windsor, are continuing, after he was released by police under investigation on Thursday evening.

His arrest came after police said they were assessing a complaint over the alleged sharing of confidential material by the former prince with late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Mountbatten-Windsor has consistently and strenuously denied any wrongdoing.

The BBC’s Helena Wilkinson has been reporting on the arrest from outside the former prince’s home, asking the question of what’s next for the King’s brother?

According to Dr Himender Makker, a consultant physician in respiratory, chest and sleep medicine at Circle Health Group: “A pillow needs to support the head, which weighs approximately 3kg. It must be firm to stop the head from sinking in too far and affecting neck curvature.”

“We all have different heads, necks and shoulders, so there cannot be one perfect pillow to meet the demands of diverse human bodies,” Dr Makker continues. “What we do know is that there is an approximate distance of six inches between the side of the neck and the tip of the shoulder. This is what should determine the height of your pillow.”

One of the most important factors when choosing a pillow is sleep position. Dr Makker says: “Most people sleep on their side (left or right), some on their back and few on their front. Any sleep position can work so long as you wake up feeling refreshed. The right pillow should help you to sleep comfortably with your neck and spine straight or slightly bent backwards (extended).”

The singer, whose real name is Charlotte Aitchison, has had now eight top 40 albums in total, with 2015’s Sucker (15), 2017’s Number 1 Angel (37), 2019’s Charli (14), 2020’s How I’m Feeling Now (33), and 2025 remix record Brat And It’s Completely Different But Also Still Brat (40).

A judge described the injury Said Sadat inflicted as ‘graphic and horrendous’

This is the mug shot of a thug who stabbed a stranger in the neck with a broken bottle in Piccadilly Gardens. Said Sadat was jailed for more than three years this week following the violent attack on July 27 last year.

The 19-year-old was approached by his would-be victim over payment of a debt. He told Sadat he was settling on his cousin’s behalf and handed him a £20 note.

Sadat ripped the note up and hissed: “I don’t need your money, I will sort you out.”

Click here to prioritise Manchester news in Google from the MEN

Manchester Crown Court heard he left, but returned armed with a broken bottle. He slashed at the man, leaving him with a large wound to his neck.

Sadat was arrested as the victim was rushed to hospital, where he received emergency surgery for a 12cm wound to his neck. He was also treated for lacerations to his upper left arm and right hand.

Sadat pleaded guilty to section 20 wounding on a basis that he did not have a knife and instead used a broken bottle, prosecutor Hayley Parkes said.

The court heard Sadat was on bail at the time having been arrested for another attack in the city centre, along with two others who had chased down two pals on a night out in Manchester city centre on June 15, 2024.

Huw Edwards, defending, said he Sadat a difficult upbringing in Afghanistan before moving to the UK when he was 17. He said he was a ‘young man’ and had limited previous convictions.

Jailing him, Recorder Ciaran Rankin said: “I have seen the graphic and horrendous neck injury. It’s only by good luck, not good fortune, you are not facing a more serious offence. You could have killed that man.”

Sadat, of Block Lane, Chadderton, Oldham, was jailed for three years and nine months for theft; assault occasioning actual bodily harm and section 20 wounding. The charges covered both incidents.

Detective Constable Peter Viney of GMP’s City of Manchester CID, who led the investigation, said: “This was a violent and unprovoked attack in one of the busiest areas of the city centre. I would like to commend the quick actions of officers and the bravery of members of the public at the scene who helped the victim who had been severely injured.

“Sadat’s sentencing today reflects the gravity of his actions and our ongoing commitment to tackling knife crime and violence in Manchester.”

A developer has been told they can’t build 27 new affordable homes on the edge of Little Thetford.

Plans to build 27 new homes on the edge of a small village have been blocked after being branded “repetitive and bland”. East Cambridgeshire District Council criticised the design of the proposed development in Little Thetford and the impact it could have on the countryside.

The new homes had been proposed for a field off The Wytches, next to the A10 junction. The developer, Cambridge Housing Society, had proposed to make all of the new homes available as affordable housing, with 23 offered at affordable rent, and four as shared ownership.

The homes were proposed to be a mix of flats, bungalows and houses, ranging in size from one-bedroom flats and bungalows, up to four-bedroom houses. The developer said the plans offered the opportunity to create “high-quality” affordable homes for the area.

They said: “The site represents a sustainable, logical extension to the settlement, providing a sensitive interface between village and countryside while contributing to local housing need.”

The plans faced backlash from people living in the village, with 48 formal objections lodged with the district council against the plans. Several raised concerns about the impact the development could have on congestion and road safety, particularly due to how close the development’s access road would be to the A10 junction.

One objector said: “As a one-way in and one-way out village, adding more housing right next to the village entrance, a known busy area for traffic, is asking for fatal accidents to happen. I’ve lived in the village all my life and I would like to continue to do so, without this increased risk.

“Not only would there be a high chance of collisions, the road is the main pedestrian route that leads to the village bus stop, frequently used by visitors, residents and school children. The additional traffic will result in increased queuing at peak times, backing into the village. Not only increasing the level of fumes for school children, but increasing the risk of queuing motorists taking risks to exit the village.”

Another objector highlighted that Little Thetford had “limited amenities and an intermittent bus service”, which they said would make people more reliant on cars and “placing further pressure on an already unsafe junction”.

Concerns were also raised about the size of the proposed development, with one person arguing that it would be “disproportionate to a village of approximately 320 dwellings”.

Questions were also raised about whether this amount of affordable housing is needed in the village, with one objector highlighting that a separate development of affordable homes was already underway.

Council argues development will ‘harm the countryside’

The district council refused to grant planning permission for the development, citing as one of its reasons that the affordable housing need in the village had already been assessed and met through a separate development.

The authority also highlighted the lack of services and facilities in Little Thetford, which it said would lead to people having to leave the village for the majority of their daily needs.

The district council added that the proposed development would cause “harm to the character and setting of the settlement and surrounding countryside”.

The decision notice said: “The proposal results introduce a large quantum of development projecting beyond the existing build line of the settlement in a very prominent location that would be highly visible on approach from both directions. The proposed layout results in the apartment block introducing an urban feature into the rural edge of the development.

“The design of the dwellings is repetitive and bland, projecting poor quality design into the countryside in a visually prominent location and the apartment blocks would be out of keeping with the existing houses.”

For more planning notices in your area visit publicnoticeportal.uk .