Elon Musk's social media platform X has blocked the accounts of people who criticise Saudi Arabia's government, so that nobody inside the country can see them anymore. Since mid-July, more than 60 accounts were hidden from users in Saudi Arabia using a tool called geoblocking — think of it like putting a sign on a shop door that says "closed in this neighbourhood, open everywhere else." The London-based human rights group ALQST reported the figure The Guardian.

The people affected include Yahya Assiri, a Saudi human rights activist who runs ALQST, and Abdullah Alaoudh, a US-based activist who speaks out about Saudi human rights violations. Other blocked accounts belong to activists living in exile, Saudi academics, and independent media.

X sent emails to the account holders saying their content had been hidden in the kingdom "in order to comply with X's obligations under Saudi Arabia's local laws." A Saudi legal order attached to the emails said the accounts had shared material that "infringes on public order, religious values, public morals or the sanctity of private life."

This is happening on other platforms too. Earlier this year, the Guardian reported that Snapchat and Meta's Facebook and Instagram had blocked dissidents' accounts after Saudi authorities said they were breaking local law. ALQST says Meta's platforms blocked more than 100 human rights accounts following Saudi government orders ALQST. A May 22, 2026 Guardian report said Snapchat may have slowed or removed accounts in Saudi Arabia without telling users, and that at least two accounts on X were already affected at that time.

Ghanem al-Masarir, a well-known Saudi satirist, was told by YouTube in May that two of his accounts, with over 800,000 subscribers combined, would be blocked in the kingdom after legal complaints from a "government entity." A British court had earlier ordered Saudi Arabia to pay al-Masarir £3 million in damages after his iPhones were hacked and he was physically attacked outside Harrods in central London. In August 2022, a British judge ruled that al-Masarir could sue Saudi Arabia over Pegasus spyware hacking of his devices.

X's decision is a change from its earlier position. When the Guardian first reported on dissident account blocking earlier this year, X said it had told users it had not taken any action after Saudi requests, and it "strongly believes in defending and respecting the voice of our users." An October 2025 Guardian report on deep ties between Twitter and Saudi Arabia described a dissident named Ahmed who believed his Twitter account had been compromised and worried that spies had access to it, which could endanger dissident Saudis.

ALQST has called on X, Meta, Snapchat, and YouTube to restore access to the accounts and explain how they made their decisions.

The broader context here is that Saudi Arabia has spent years trying to control online criticism, using both official legal requests and secret operations. In April 2020, Twitter announced the removal of 5,350 accounts linked to Saudi Arabia and operating out of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United States DFRLab. Saudi Arabia's formal legal requests to tech companies sit alongside documented covert activity targeting dissidents abroad, including the use of spyware and physical intimidation.

For the platforms, Saudi Arabia's takedown requests create a direct clash between following local laws and standing by free expression. X went from refusing Saudi requests to geoblocking dozens of accounts, joining Meta, Snapchat, and YouTube in the same pattern. Some of the blocked account holders have actually won legal cases against Saudi state hacking in foreign courts, which raises the question of whether platform compliance lets governments retaliate against people who have successfully challenged them.

What comes next depends on whether the platforms answer ALQST's demands for transparency, and whether activists like Alaoudh pursue legal or policy challenges. The overlap of platform rules, government takedown power, and cross-border repression has pushed lawmakers and digital rights groups to act before, though lasting enforcement has been limited.