State Department Threatens UK Over Grok Investigation, Because Only The US Is Allowed To Ban Foreign Apps – Above the Law

So
let
me
get
this
straight.
The
United
States
government
spent
years championing
a
ban
on
TikTok, rushed
it
through
the
Supreme
Court with
claims
of
grave
national
security
threats, got
a
9-0
ruling
blessing
government
censorship of
an
entire
platform
used
by
170
million
Americans…
and
now
it’s
the
US
State
Department
thinking
that
it’s
all
cool
to threaten the
United
Kingdom
for considering
similar
action against
X’s
Grok
chatbot
over
its
generation
of
sexualized
deepfake
images,
including
those
of
children?

We
all
know
that
the
US
can
be
hypocritical,
but
this
all
seems
a
bit
over
the
top.

Here’s
what
actually
happened:
the
UK’s
communications
regulator
Ofcom opened
an
investigation into
whether
X
violated
the
country’s
Online
Safety
Act
by
allowing
Grok
to
create
and
distribute
non-consensual
intimate
images
(NCII).
This
isn’t
some
theoretical
concern—as
I
detailed
last
week,
Grok
has
been churning
out
sexualized
images at
an
alarming
rate,
with
users
publicly
generating
“undressing”
content
and
worse,
in
many
cases
targeting
real
women
and
girls.
UK
Technology
Secretary
Liz
Kendall
told
Parliament
that
Ofcom
could
impose
fines
up
to
£18
million
or seek
a
court
order
to
block
X
entirely if
violations
are
found.

Enter
Sarah
B.
Rogers,
the
Trump-appointed
Under
Secretary
of
State
for
Public
Diplomacy,
who
decided
this
was
the
perfect
moment
to threaten
a
close
US
ally.
In
an
interview
with
GB
News,
Rogers
declared:

I
would
say
from
America’s
perspective
…
nothing
is
off
the
table
when
it
comes
to
free
speech.
Let’s
wait
and
see
what
Ofcom
does
and
we’ll
see
what
America
does
in
response.

She
went
further,
accusing
the
British
government
of
wanting
“the
ability
to
curate
a
public
square,
to
suppress
political
viewpoints
it
dislikes”
and
claiming
that
X
has
“a
political
valence
that
the
British
government
is
antagonistic
to.”

This
is
weapons-grade
nonsense,
and
Rogers
knows
it.

The
UK
isn’t
investigating
X
because
they
don’t
like
Elon
Musk’s
politics.
They’re
investigating
because
Grok
is
being
used
to
create
sexualized
deepfakes
of
real
people
without
consent,
including
minors.
Unless
Rogers
is
prepared
to
stand
up
and
argue
that
generating
non-consensual
sexualized
imagery
of
real
people—including
children—is
somehow
quintessential
“conservative
speech”
that
the
US
must
defend,
she’s
deliberately
mischaracterizing
what’s
happening
here.
Is
that
really
the
hill
the
State
Department
wants
to
die
on?
That
deepfake
NCII
is
conservative
speech?

As
UK
Prime
Minister
Keir
Starmer’s
spokesperson
put
it:

“It’s
about
the
generation
of
criminal
imagery
of
children
and
women
and
girls
that
is
not
acceptable.
We
cannot
stand
by
and
let
that
continue.
And
that
is
why
we’ve
taken
the
action
we
have.”

But
here’s
where
the
hypocrisy
becomes
truly
spectacular:
just
this
week,
the
Republican-led
Senate
unanimously passed
the
DEFIANCE
Act for
the
second
time.
This
legislation
would
create
a
federal
civil
cause
of
action
allowing
victims
of
non-consensual
deepfake
intimate
imagery
to
sue
the
producers
of
such
content.
No
matter
what
you
think
of
that
particular
bill
(I
have
my
concerns
about
the
specifics
of
how
the
bill
works),
it’s
quite
something
when
you
have
the
State
Department’s
mafioso-like
threat
being
issued
to
the
UK
if
they
take any action
to
respond
to
what’s
happening
on
X
at
the
same
time
the
MAGA-led
US
Senate
is
voting
unanimously
to
move
forward
on
a
bill
that
could
have
a
similar
impact.

So
let’s
review
the
US
government’s
position:

Banning
an
entire
social
media
platform
because
China might access
data
(that
they
can
already
buy
from
data
brokers
anyway)?
Perfectly
fine,
rush
it
through
SCOTUS.
Allowing
victims
to
sue
over
non-consensual
sexualized
deepfakes?
Great
idea,
unanimous
Senate
support.
Another
country
investigating
whether
a
platform
violated
laws
against
generating
sexualized
deepfakes
of
minors?
UNACCEPTABLE
CENSORSHIP,
NOTHING
IS
OFF
THE
TABLE.

The
MAGA
mindset
in
a
nutshell:
performative
nonsense
when
it
fits
within
a
certain
bucket
(in
this
case
the
“OMG
Europeans
censoring
Elon”)
no
matter
that
it
conflicts
with
stated
beliefs
elsewhere.

It’s
important
to
consider
all
of
this
in
light
of
the
whole
TikTok
ban
fiasco.
When
the
Supreme
Court
blessed
Congress’s
decision
to
ban
an
app
based
on
vague
national
security
concerns—concerns
so
urgent
that
the
Biden
administration
immediately
decided
not
to
enforce
the
ban
after
winning
in
court
and
which
Trump
has
continued
to
not
enforce
for
an
entire
year—America
effectively
torched
its
moral
authority
to
criticize
other
countries
for
restricting
platforms.

As
I
wrote
when
that
ruling
came
down,
we
essentially
said
it’s
okay
to
create
a
Great
Firewall
of
America.
We
told
the
world
that
if
you
claim
“national
security”
loudly
enough,
with
sufficient
“bipartisan
support,”
you
can
ban
whatever
app
you
want,
First
Amendment
concerns
be
damned.
Chinese
officials
have
pointed
to
the
US’s
TikTok
ban
to
justify
their
own
internet
restrictions,
and
now
we’re
handing
authoritarian
regimes
another
gift:
the
US
will
threaten
retaliation
if
you
try
to
enforce
laws
against
platforms
generating
sexualized
imagery
of
children.

When
you
blow
up
the
principle
that
countries
shouldn’t
ban
apps
based
on
content
concerns,
you
don’t
get
to
suddenly
rediscover
those
principles
when
it’s
your
billionaire’s
app
on
the
chopping
block.

And
make
no
mistake
about
what
Rogers
is
really
defending
here.
Grok
continues
to
generate
sexualized
content
at
scale.
Elon
Musk
continues
running
X
like
an
edgelord
teenager
who
knows
he’s
rich
enough
to
avoid
consequences,
and
women—especially
young
women—continue
facing
harassment
and
abuse
via
these
tools.

The
State
Department’s
threats
aren’t
about
defending
free
speech.
They’re
about
protecting
Musk’s
business
interests.
It’s
about
maintaining
the
double
standard
that
got
us
here:
American
companies
can
do
whatever
they
want
globally,
but
foreign
companies
operating
in
America
face
existential
threats
for
far
less.

The
UK
is
investigating
potential
violations
of
laws
against
generating
sexualized
imagery
of
minors
and
non-consenting
adults.
If
the
State
Department
thinks
that’s
“censorship,”
they
should
explain
why
the
Senate
just
voted
unanimously
to
let
victims
sue
over
exactly
that
conduct.

Look,
the
UK’s
investigation
may
or
may
not
lead
anywhere.
Ofcom
may
find
violations,
or
it
may
not.
They
may
impose
fines,
or
they
may
not.
They
may
seek
to
block
X,
or
they
may
not.
But
the
one
thing
the
US
government
absolutely
cannot
do
with
a
straight
face
is
threaten
them
for
even
considering
it.

You
don’t
get
to
ban
TikTok
and
then
act
outraged
when
other
countries
contemplate
similar
actions
against
American
companies.
You
don’t
get
to
pass
unanimous
legislation
allowing
lawsuits
over
deepfake
NCII
while
your
State
Department
calls
investigations
into
that
same
deepfake
NCII
“censorship.”
You
don’t
get
to
spend
years
claiming
that
national
security
justifies
any
restriction
on
platforms
and
then
suddenly
discover
that
“free
speech”
means
other
countries
can’t
enforce
their
laws.

There
are
no
principles
here,
only
sheer
abuse
of
power.
And
Sarah
Rogers’s
threat
to
the
UK
makes
that
abundantly
clear:
the
rules
we
claimed
justified
banning
TikTok
apparently
only
apply
when
we’re
the
ones
doing
the
banning.

State
Department
Threatens
UK
Over
Grok
Investigation,
Because
Only
The
US
Is
Allowed
To
Ban
Foreign
Apps

+263 242 744 677

4 Gunhill Avenue,

State Department Threatens UK Over Grok Investigation, Because Only The US Is Allowed To Ban Foreign Apps – Above the Law