Elon Musk's X has blocked the accounts of Saudi Arabian dissidents so they are no longer visible inside the kingdom, following orders from Saudi authorities. Since mid-July, more than 60 accounts on X were made unavailable in Saudi Arabia through geoblocking — a technique that prevents users in a specific country from viewing certain content while leaving it accessible elsewhere — according to the London-based human rights organisation ALQST The Guardian.

Those affected include Yahya Assiri, a Saudi human rights activist who runs ALQST, and Abdullah Alaoudh, a US-based activist and vocal critic of Saudi human rights violations. Other affected accounts belong to exiled activists, Saudi academics, and independent media.

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

The takedowns extend across multiple platforms. Earlier this year, the Guardian reported that Snapchat and Meta's Facebook and Instagram had blocked dissidents' accounts over allegations by Saudi authorities that they were violating local law. ALQST has stated that Meta's platforms blocked more than 100 human rights accounts following Saudi government orders ALQST. A May 22, 2026 Guardian report added that Snapchat may have slowed or removed accounts in Saudi Arabia without alerting users, and that at least two accounts on X were already affected at that time.

Ghanem al-Masarir, a prominent Saudi satirist, was notified by YouTube in May that two of his accounts, with more than 800,000 subscribers combined, would be blocked in the kingdom after legal complaints made 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 current compliance marks a shift from its earlier position. When the Guardian first reported on dissident account blocking earlier this year, X said it had notified users that it had not taken any action following requests by Saudi authorities, 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 provide transparency over how the decisions were reached.

The broader context here is a years-long Saudi effort to exert control over online dissent through both state legal mechanisms and covert 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. Riyadh's use of formal legal requests to platform companies operates alongside documented covert activity targeting dissidents abroad, including spyware deployment and physical intimidation.

For platforms, the Saudi takedown requests pose a direct conflict between compliance with local laws and commitments to free expression. X's reversal from its earlier refusal to act on Saudi requests to its current geoblocking of dozens of accounts places it in the same compliance pattern already established by Meta, Snapchat, and YouTube. The affected accounts include figures with documented legal victories against Saudi state hacking, raising the question of whether platform compliance enables state retaliation against individuals who have successfully challenged covert operations in foreign courts.

What may come next hinges on whether the affected platforms respond to ALQST's transparency demands and whether US-based activists like Alaoudh pursue legal or policy challenges. The intersection of platform governance, state takedown authority, and transnational repression has historically generated pressure from lawmakers and digital rights organisations, though sustained enforcement mechanisms remain limited.