X Under Fire After Dozens of Racist N-Word and P-Word Posts About UK Politicians Go Unremoved

X has come under fire after reports that racist posts targeting UK politicians, including repeated use of the N-word and P-word, were left online despite being flagged for removal, according to research by the thinktank British Future.

The findings suggest the platform only acted when content was specifically reported as illegal under UK law, rather than under its 'hate, abuse or harassment' reporting route.

X should be able to handle moderation requests under the UK's Online Safety Act framework, which places legal obligations on platforms to address illegal content more quickly. Researchers say that distinction is proving decisive in whether abusive posts are removed or left visible.

For context, the research followed months of monitoring of posts directed at several prominent political figures, including Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, and other UK public figures across party lines.

X Moderation Practices Under 'UK Online Safety Act'

British Future reported that it had identified around 30 posts in which Kemi Badenoch was directly racially abused, including repeated use of the N-word. All were reported through X's standard 'hate, abuse, or harassment' reporting category. According to the researchers, the platform declined to take action in most cases.

Avaes Mohammad, a researcher involved in the study, said the system effectively forced users into a narrower legal pathway. 'Many people will intuitively report racist posts as 'hate, abuse or harassment' – but it seems X doesn't consider it as hate,' he said. He added that only posts flagged as illegal were consistently reviewed for removal.

In a separate sample, British Future reported 33 posts using the P-word targeting British Asian public figures, including Reform UK's Zia Yusuf, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, former SNP leader Humza Yousaf, and others. The organisation said none of these posts were removed within the first 48 hours, despite Ofcom's expectations for faster review of illegal content.

Some of the material described in the findings included explicit racial slurs and, in one case, a post directed at Zarah Sultana, accompanied by an image of a noose. Researchers said this remained visible after initial reporting when submitted under the non-legal category.

X Enforcement and 'Illegal Content' Thresholds

The Guardian has reported that X tends to take action primarily when posts are reported specifically as illegal under the Online Safety Act, rather than under general community safety categories.

In those cases, visibility may be restricted in the UK, although the content can remain accessible elsewhere.

Researchers say this creates a significant gap between user expectations and platform enforcement. Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said the reporting process effectively shifts the burden onto users to complete more complex legal forms. He described the system as 'onerous' when applied at scale to multiple posts.

Ofcom, the UK communications regulator, has confirmed that platforms are required to have 'appropriate measures in place' to comply with their duties under the Online Safety Act. It also noted that X has committed to reviewing suspected illegal content through its dedicated reporting tools within an average of 24 hours, with performance assessed on a quarterly basis.

However, enforcement remains uneven.

British Future said X eventually restricted 20 of the reported posts after being contacted by Ofcom, but others remained untouched. None of the accounts identified in the research were suspended, including one user who was said to have posted the N-word dozens of times in a short period.

Political Abuse and Platform Responsibility

The findings also point to a disturbing pattern of political targeting.

Researchers said spikes in racist abuse often coincided with political debates or public interventions, suggesting a link between online discourse and real-world events.

One example highlighted a surge in racist posts following public comments by Kemi Badenoch, with researchers recording a marked increase in abusive content within a single day. The report argues that this pattern reflects how quickly political moments can translate into online harassment.

X has not publicly responded to the latest allegations. Elon Musk, who acquired the platform in 2022, has previously faced criticism over moderation policies and the handling of harmful content. The company's approach continues to draw heat as regulators in the UK expand enforcement of online safety rules.

For now, the central question remains unresolved: whether X's current reporting system is adequately capturing racist abuse when it is flagged in the way most users naturally understand it, or whether enforcement is effectively limited to a narrower legal interpretation of harm.