A year after Elon Musk’s takeover, UK revenues for X plummeted

Tech Crunch - Apr 16th, 2025

X, formerly known as Twitter, has witnessed a significant financial downturn in the UK following Elon Musk's acquisition and subsequent changes to moderation controls. The UK entity's revenue plummeted by 66.3% year-on-year, down to £69.1 million, with profits also dropping substantially. This decline is attributed to internal concerns about 'brand safety and/or content moderation', leading to a significant reduction in staff numbers from 399 to 114 employees. The company has stated it is taking corrective measures to rebuild trust with advertisers through enhanced brand safety tools and content moderation.

Despite these financial challenges, the overall value of X has recovered to its original $44 billion purchase price, facilitated by its acquisition by Musk's X.AI for $33 billion. This story highlights the broader implications of leadership changes on corporate strategy and financial health, particularly concerning content moderation in the digital space. The UK division was also at risk of being struck off for delayed account filings, underscoring administrative challenges faced in the transition. The scenario underscores the complexities and risks associated with significant organizational shifts, especially in the context of global social media platforms.

Elon Musk Social Media X Content Moderation Uk Market Twitter Uk Ltd Revenue Decline Brand Safety X.Ai Acquisition

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.6

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a detailed account of X's financial challenges in the UK following Elon Musk's takeover, supported by credible sources and clear data presentation. It effectively highlights the significant declines in revenue and workforce, contributing to its timeliness and public interest. However, the story could benefit from a broader range of perspectives and more in-depth analysis of the corrective measures being implemented. While the article's clarity and readability are strong, its potential impact and engagement could be enhanced by incorporating more diverse viewpoints and interactive elements. Overall, the story offers a solid overview of the situation but leaves room for further exploration of the underlying issues and their broader implications.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims about X's financial performance in the UK, including revenue and profit declines, workforce reductions, and issues with account filings. These claims are supported by references to accounts filed with the UK's Companies House, which enhances their verifiability. The reported figures, such as the 66.3% revenue drop and the profit decline from £5.6m to £1.2m, align with these filings and are consistent with external reports. However, the story could benefit from additional context or corroboration from more diverse sources to further bolster its accuracy. Specific details about the internal concerns regarding 'brand safety and/or content moderation' are attributed to The Guardian, which is a reputable source, adding credibility to this aspect of the story.

Balance

The article largely focuses on the negative financial outcomes for X following Elon Musk's takeover, emphasizing declines in revenue, profits, and workforce numbers. While it mentions some corrective measures being taken by the company, it lacks a broader range of perspectives, particularly from stakeholders such as employees, advertisers, or industry analysts. This narrow focus might lead to an imbalanced view, as it primarily highlights the challenges without equally exploring potential positive developments or differing viewpoints on Musk's strategic decisions.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear language to convey its main points about X's financial decline in the UK. The logical flow of information helps readers understand the sequence of events and the implications of the reported figures. The tone is neutral, focusing on reporting the facts without sensationalism. However, some technical terms, such as 'pre-tax profits,' might benefit from brief explanations to ensure comprehension by a broader audience.

Source quality

The story references credible sources, including The Guardian and financial filings with the UK's Companies House, to substantiate its claims. These are authoritative sources that lend weight to the article's credibility. However, the story could improve by incorporating a wider variety of sources, such as direct quotes from company executives or independent analysts, to provide a more comprehensive view of the situation and reduce potential reliance on a limited number of perspectives.

Transparency

The article provides a clear basis for its claims, referencing specific financial figures and attributing information to reliable sources like The Guardian and Companies House filings. However, it lacks detailed explanations of the methodology used to gather and interpret the data, which could enhance transparency. Additionally, the story could benefit from disclosing any potential conflicts of interest or biases in the presentation of the information, particularly regarding the portrayal of Elon Musk's impact on the company.