X’s owner, Elon Musk, has also come under fire for suggesting that the riots meant that “civil war is inevitable” and for claiming that prime minister Keir Starmer was considering sending far-right rioters to “emergency detainment camps” in the Falklands, in a post that has now been deleted.
Cheryl Samuels, people and culture director at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, decided to leave the platform as she felt that X has enabled extremist views, making her feel unsafe.
Speaking to HR magazine, she said: “What's really influenced me is seeing the openness with which racial tensions have surfaced on the platform, with people consuming so much misinformation, manipulating images and posting racial slurs.
“There seems to be no recourse on Twitter, and little moderation of the site. That is directly impacting people like myself from the global majority, who are on the viewing end of these racial tropes. I think the content on X fuelled some of the rioters, and I was at risk.”
X has been contacted for comment.
Read more: Firm featured in viral firing video slammed for poor HR practice
Samuels questioned whether organisations that decide to remain on X are being consistent with commitments to inclusion.
She said: “Organisations need to think about whether they truly want to address racism, islamophobia and antisemitism. They need to think about the impact of X on employees from diverse backgrounds and on society more widely. Any organisation remaining on the platform with the knowledge that it is spreading misinformation is leaving people like myself with big questions about their values.”
Three in 10 UK users of X say that they are considering leaving the site, according to a survey of 2,237 people between 9 and 11 August conducted by market research company Savanta.
However, other users have questioned if leaving the platform will be productive. Tanya de Grunwald, founder of the Good and Fair Employers Club, a membership organisation for employers of young people, told HR magazine that leaving X could limit necessary discussions.
She asked: “Have these decisions been made with cool heads – or are they knee-jerk responses by misguided teams prioritising safety-ism and virtue-signalling? Sure, X can be rough – but are staff in real danger from their firm having a company account? If not, I’m confused – is this a political statement, or a protest against Elon Musk?
“I get it, but retreating into echo chambers is dangerous too. Surely the solution to our problems is more discussion, not less?”
Some users have opted to limit or pause posts, rather than leaving the platform entirely. Speaking to HR magazine, David D’Souza, director of profession at the CIPD, which has decided to pause posting on X, said: “We recognise and believe that there's a gap between what we've seen on the platform and the values we have as an organisation. However, we’re open to that changing over time, which is why we are scaling down our presence on X rather than removing ourselves entirely.”
Read more: How can HR deal with social media auditing?
D’Souza said that organisations should make their decision about staying on or leaving X based on their individual values, and what they feel would best serve staff and customers.
He said: “Different organisations and individuals will have different choices. For the nature of work that the CIPD, we feel we could better serve the profession by operating in different spaces, especially as we’ve seen our members begin to move to other platforms. It was a values-based decision. But this is a difficult call for organisations to make.
“I think they need to weigh up why they’re thinking about leaving X. Are they hoping to be noticed? Are they hoping to be anti-something? Or is it because they can serve better elsewhere?”
