According to engadget, just one day after receiving a roughly $140 million fine from the European Commission, X terminated the legislative body’s advertising account on the platform. X’s head of product, Nikita Bier, publicly accused the commission of logging into a dormant ad account to use an “exploit” in X’s Ad Composer. Bier claimed the EU posted a link designed to deceive users into thinking it was a video, artificially boosting the reach of its post announcing the fine. The European Commission’s spokesperson, Thomas Regnier, confirmed this was the first-ever fine under the new Digital Services Act (DSA), citing issues with X’s verification system and lack of transparency. In response to the fine, X owner Elon Musk replied to the commission’s post, calling it “bullshit,” while the company now must submit an action plan to address the DSA’s concerns.
The petty war escalates
Look, this is peak Musk-era X. A regulatory body slaps you with a historic fine, so you hit back by locking their ad account and calling their lead regulator’s public statement “bullshit” on the platform itself. It’s a spectacularly combative move. Bier’s thread frames it as a principled stand against platform abuse, saying the exploit was “never been abused like this” and is now patched. But come on. The timing is impossibly convenient and feels deeply retaliatory. The European Commission’s original post about the fine was arguably cheeky, but accusing them of “deceiving users” is a massive escalation in rhetoric. This isn’t just a policy dispute anymore; it’s a public, personal feud.
A regulatory line in the sand
Here’s the thing: the $140 million fine wasn’t for some minor infraction. The DSA is the EU’s new big stick for policing big tech, and this is its first major swing. The allegations are serious—a deceptive verification system (those gold checkmarks anyone can buy), a non-compliant ad repository, and hobbled data access for researchers. These strike at the core of platform integrity and accountability. So when X responds by shutting off the regulator’s ads, it sends a clear message: we will not cooperate gracefully. This feels less like a legal strategy and more like a middle finger. The problem for X is that the EU tends to have a longer memory and deeper pockets than most.
What happens next?
So where does this go? X still has to submit that action plan to the European Commission. How do you negotiate in good faith with an entity you’ve just publicly accused of cheating and whose statements your CEO labels as nonsense? The relationship is utterly poisoned. I think we’re going to see more fines. The DSA has a whole toolbox of enforcement measures, including periodic penalty payments. This initial fine was for past breaches. If X’s “fixes” are deemed insufficient or if new violations are found, the financial taps can keep flowing. Musk might be willing to treat it as a cost of doing business in Europe, but that’s a dangerous game when the regulator has the power to potentially suspend your service.
The bigger picture for platforms
Basically, this is a stress test for the new era of tech regulation. The EU is setting a precedent that platforms must be transparent and accountable by design, not just when it’s convenient. X is testing the precedent that a platform can fight the regulator head-on, in public, and try to win the narrative war. Other platforms are watching closely. Will the EU’s resolve hold against this kind of aggressive pushback? Or will X’s tactics create enough friction and bad PR to force a compromise? One thing’s for sure: the quiet backroom negotiations between tech giants and governments are over. The battles are now on the timeline, for everyone to see.
