BY COMFORT OGBONNA
Elon Musk has been summoned to Paris on Monday as investigators examine allegations of misconduct tied to the social media platform X, including the spread of child sexual abuse material and deepfake content.
The world’s richest man and Linda Yaccarino have been called for “voluntary interviews,” while other employees are expected to testify as witnesses throughout the week, according to the Paris prosecutor’s office.
It remains unclear whether Musk and Yaccarino will appear in person. A spokesperson for X did not respond to inquiries, and Yaccarino’s current company, eMed, also declined to comment.
French prosecutors are additionally investigating whether controversy surrounding the platform’s AI system, Grok, and its deepfake outputs may have been intentionally amplified to increase the valuation of Musk-owned companies ahead of a significant market listing. Authorities have alerted U.S. officials, while Musk reacted online by posting, “This needs to stop,” after reports that American authorities declined to assist.
The summons follows a search conducted in February at X’s French offices as part of an investigation launched in January 2025 by the cybercrime unit of the Paris prosecutor’s office. Musk and Yaccarino were invited in their roles as executives at the time of the alleged incidents. Yaccarino served as CEO from May 2023 until July 2025.
Prosecutors stated that the voluntary interviews are intended to allow executives to present their positions and outline any compliance measures. The investigation is described as a constructive effort aimed at ensuring X adheres to French law while operating within the country.
Authorities have not commented on whether Musk could face penalties if he fails to attend.
The probe began after a complaint from a French lawmaker who alleged that biased algorithms on X may have interfered with automated data processing systems. It expanded following incidents involving Grok, which allegedly generated content denying the Holocaust—an offense under French law—and produced sexually explicit deepfake material.
Investigators are examining potential complicity in the possession and distribution of illegal images involving minors, the dissemination of explicit deepfakes, denial of crimes against humanity, and manipulation of automated systems as part of an organized group.
Developed by xAI and integrated into X, Grok drew global criticism after generating non-consensual, sexualized deepfake images in response to user prompts. In another widely shared post, the chatbot inaccurately described the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau as facilities for disinfection rather than mass murder—language historically linked to Holocaust denial. The chatbot later corrected its statements, acknowledging historical evidence that over one million people were killed there using Zyklon B.
In March, the Paris prosecutor’s office notified the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission, suggesting that the controversy around Grok’s deepfake content may have been deliberately orchestrated to artificially boost the value of X and xAI, potentially constituting criminal conduct.
Officials indicated this could have occurred ahead of a planned June 2026 stock market listing tied to a new entity formed through a merger between SpaceX and xAI, at a time when X was reportedly losing momentum.
Reports indicate that the U.S. Justice Department declined to assist French investigators, arguing that the request could entangle the United States in a politically sensitive case and potentially interfere with the operations of an American business.
French authorities have not publicly responded to those claims.
Meanwhile, Reporters Without Borders said it has filed a new complaint against X, accusing the platform of enabling the spread of disinformation.
The organization stated that misleading campaigns have gained significant traction on the platform, and despite repeated alerts, X has failed to remove the content, often responding with automated refusals. It argued that such practices reflect a deliberate policy incompatible with the public’s right to reliable information.