In a recent episode of The View, a segment intended to explore the influence of tech billionaires took an unexpected turn that has since ignited public discourse. Remarks made by co-host Whoopi Goldberg and others about Elon Musk’s four-year-old son, X Æ A-Xii, have drawn criticism from parents, public figures, and media watchdogs, all questioning whether the show crossed a line by referencing a minor in a comedic context.
What Happened on The View
During a discussion on powerful families in media and technology, the panel of The View shifted focus to Elon Musk—Tesla and SpaceX CEO, and owner of X (formerly Twitter). The conversation, which began with commentary on Musk’s public influence, quickly turned personal when his son’s unique name, X Æ A-Xii, became the subject of humor.
“You can’t name a child after a captcha code and expect them to be normal,” Goldberg said with a laugh, according to footage of the live broadcast. Co-host Joy Behar followed with, “Can you imagine the poor kid at school roll call? ‘X-Ash-A-12, present!’” The audience, used to the show’s sharp wit, responded with mixed reactions—some laughed, while others appeared uncomfortable.
Though intended as satire, the segment provoked strong reactions online. Critics argued that making jokes about a child’s name—especially when that child has no role in public discourse—is inappropriate and potentially harmful.
Musk’s Response and Public Reaction
Elon Musk responded publicly within hours on X, writing:
“Mocking a 4-year-old child on national television is disgraceful and cowardly. @TheView should be ashamed. I demand an immediate apology—not just to my son, but to every parent watching.”
The statement quickly gained traction, amassing millions of views and sparking a conversation on social media about ethics in media. Hashtags like #BoycottTheView, #ApologizeToX, and #RespectChildren trended globally.
Many viewers, including parents and advocacy groups, voiced their concerns, emphasizing that public figures—especially children—deserve protection from ridicule, regardless of their parents’ notoriety.
One social media user commented:
“This isn’t about fame. It’s about respect for kids. No child should be mocked for something they didn’t choose, like their name.”
The View’s Official Response
In the next episode, The View briefly addressed the controversy. A statement from the show’s producers was read during a commercial transition:
“We understand that our recent comments about Elon Musk’s family have generated strong reactions. The View has always championed open dialogue and satire. While we may push boundaries, our intent is never to cause harm. We move forward with love and humor.”
However, the lack of a direct apology and the absence of acknowledgment from the hosts themselves drew further backlash. Critics argued that the statement failed to show accountability or address the specific concerns raised by viewers.
Public Figures Weigh In
Several commentators and media professionals joined the conversation, emphasizing the importance of responsible media. Dan Abrams, a legal analyst and journalist, stated in a discussion on NewsNation that “children of public figures should not be subjected to public ridicule, especially on national platforms.”¹
Others pointed out the potential for long-term reputational impact, particularly when viral media content involves minors.
Free Speech vs. Responsibility
Some defenders of The View argued that satire is a vital part of media commentary, especially in shows like The View, which regularly tackle controversial topics with humor. However, media experts stress the need for ethical considerations, particularly when the subject is a child.
According to Dr. Caroline Fitzpatrick, a developmental psychologist at Concordia University, “Children’s mental and emotional development can be affected when they become subjects of public commentary, especially in negative or mocking contexts.”²
This raises broader questions: Where do we draw the line between free speech and social responsibility? Is it ever appropriate for the children of public figures to be used in satirical commentary?
Legal and Ethical Implications
While no legal action has been officially filed, Musk’s response hinted at possible next steps. In a follow-up post on X, he called the show’s response “a cowardly non-apology,” and added:
“Hiding behind ‘satire’ to mock a child? That’s the lowest of the low. This isn’t over.”
Legal experts have pointed out that while media satire is generally protected under the First Amendment in the United States, it does not make content immune to public criticism or advertiser pressure.³
If Musk or advocacy groups pursue formal complaints or pressure advertisers to reconsider their support of programs that involve minors in satire, it could set a precedent in how family-related content is handled by entertainment platforms.
Broader Cultural Impact
This controversy has reopened discussions about media accountability, especially in light of increasing concern over how children of celebrities and public figures are treated in the public eye. High-profile parents, from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to athletes and actors, have spoken out in the past about the need to respect children’s privacy and dignity.
Moreover, the issue may push networks and production teams to reexamine their editorial standards and consider developing clearer boundaries when discussing personal aspects of public figures’ lives—particularly involving minors.
A Cultural Turning Point?
Regardless of where public opinion falls, the incident has spotlighted the need for greater sensitivity in media. As the digital age continues to blur the lines between entertainment, news, and personal commentary, moments like this force viewers, creators, and media professionals alike to evaluate their values and practices.
Whether Elon Musk continues to pursue an official apology or broader advocacy around children’s representation in the media, the conversation that has emerged from this incident is likely to leave a lasting impact on daytime programming and media ethics more broadly.
Sources:
- Abrams, Dan. “Media Should Leave Kids Alone.” NewsNation, April 2025.
https://www.newsnationnow.com/ - Fitzpatrick, C. et al. “The Influence of Public Exposure on Child Development.” Concordia University Research Journal, 2022.
https://www.concordia.ca/ - Columbia University Knight First Amendment Institute. “Satire, Free Speech, and Legal Boundaries in Media.”
https://knightcolumbia.org
