After 'X' failed to address disinformation about RSF on its platform, the press freedom group is now pursuing the matter via the French courts, arguing that 'X' is complicit in disseminating false information and identity theft.
This statement was originally published on rsf.org on 13 November 2024.
After discovering that it was the target of a disinformation campaign, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) filed ten reports of policy violations with the social media platform X, flagging the main accounts responsible for spreading the deceptive content. As none of the offending posts have been removed, the NGO is pursuing Elon Musk’s company in the French courts for its complicity in disseminating false information, misrepresentation and identity theft.
Is X’s deliberate unwillingness to fight disinformation punishable by law? Does it make the company complicit in the pollution of public debate? With the new case brought forth by RSF, the French courts now have the opportunity to address these pressing questions, establish X’s legal obligations and hold it to account. The case highlights the lack of moderation that allows disinformation to flourish on Elon Musk’s social media platform. RSF is represented by lawyer Emmanuel Daoud and his team from the law firm Vigo in this legal affair.
In late August, RSF discovered a video falsely labelled as content from the BBC, Britain’s public broadcaster, claiming RSF authored a study on Nazi beliefs among members of the Ukrainian military. RSF revealed how the Russian state “laundered” this false information by repeating it through official channels, namely its foreign ministry and two of its foreign embassies.
The video — which uses RSF’s logo, graphic charter, and photos of RSF’s advocacy director — was widely shared, mainly on X and Telegram, reaching nearly half a million views by 13 September, when RSF published its investigation.
RSF, which subscribes to X’s Premium service, filed 10 reports of illegal content — via the platform’s reporting system established under the Digital Services Act — regarding the posts that most heavily contributed to the spread of this disinformation. After a series of rejections from X and requests for additional information — which RSF provided — none of the reports resulted in the removal of the defamatory content targeting our organisation and its advocacy director.
“X’s refusal to remove content that it knows is false and deceitful — as it was duly informed by RSF — makes it complicit in the spread of the disinformation circulating on its platform. X provides those who spread falsehoods and manipulate public opinion with a powerful arsenal of tools and unparalleled visibility, while granting the perpetrators total impunity. It’s time for X to be held accountable. Pressing criminal charges is the last resort against the disinformation and war propaganda that RSF has fallen victim to, which is proliferating on this ‘Muskian’ network.”
Antoine Bernard, RSF’s Director of Advocacy and Assistance
“These legal proceedings seek to remind X, a powerful social media company, and its executives that they can be held criminally responsible if they knowingly provide a platform and tools for disseminating false information, identity theft, misrepresentation, and defamation — offences punishable under the French Penal Code. Given Russia’s crimes of aggression and criminal propaganda against Ukraine and Ukrainians — with its series of war crimes and crimes against humanity — X’s impunity must be fought through law and sanctioned by the French justice system from the moment the serious reported offences are clearly evidenced.”
Emmanuel Daoud, RSF’s Lawyer
X’s responses to RSF’s reports appeared to be automated messages, suggesting that the requests had not even been processed by humans. Playing Elon Musk’s own game, RSF questioned Grok — an AI chatbot operated by one of Musk’s companies with real-time access to X’s data — about “Patricia,” the first account to post the video containing false information about RSF. Grok indicated that posts from this account had already been reported for “controversial and provocative” content or “inappropriate or hateful” behaviour. Patricia’s post was not removed, and the account continues to post regularly, describing Ukrainians as “Nazis” and “barbarians.” These insults seem to enjoy the same royal treatment as disinformation.
In addition to the legal proceedings in France, RSF also provided testimony to the European Commission — which opened formal proceedings against X on 18 December 2023 — by sharing the findings from its investigation into the deceptive video, as well as information about the reports it filed with X. During the hearing, RSF highlighted the utter ineffectiveness of X’s reporting system, put in place under the EU’s Digital Services Act. RSF also underscored the misleading nature of X’s blue check marks, which are supposed to guarantee that the authenticity of an X account has been verified: despite the blue checkmark next to RSF’s handle, the content flagged for being falsely attributed to the NGO remains online and has been shared by “verified” and reported accounts.
Since July, RSF has fallen victim to three different videos that used its logo, images of its employees and its reputation as an expert organisation to spread false information on social media that echoes the Kremlin’s war narrative.
