Lisa Nandy to depart X

Lisa Nandy leaving X is unlikely to trouble many users, but the direction of travel should trouble everyone. When ministers and departments abandon major public platforms, political debate doesn’t get cleaner; it gets more fragmented, less accountable and more tribal. Abuse and misinformation are real problems, but walking away hands the town square to the loudest voices rather than fixing it. Government should be robust enough to face hostile platforms, challenge falsehoods and defend free expression in public, not retreat into safer, more managed channels.

Lisa Nandy is right to say platforms have a responsibility for the environment they create, not just the content they technically allow. Free speech does not mean an algorithm should reward abuse, misinformation and outrage because it keeps people scrolling.

But government departments also have a responsibility to communicate where the public actually is, especially during emergencies or when policy affects people who may not follow official channels elsewhere. Leaving X is a powerful statement; it cannot be the full strategy.

The real test is whether this creates pressure for platforms to make their systems safer and more accountable, rather than simply moving political voices into friendlier rooms. We should not normalise abuse as the price of public debate. But nor should we give up on public spaces because they have become difficult. Fixing the digital town square is harder than leaving it, but it matters far more.