A new European social media platform called W launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 20, 2026, positioning itself as a values-driven alternative to X with mandatory human verification for all users. Led by former eBay Vice President Anna Zeiter and backed by Swedish entrepreneur Ingmar Rentzhog— who helped launch Greta Thunberg to global fame —the platform promises European data sovereignty, strict EU privacy compliance, and a beta release in summer 2026 followed by public launch later that year.
The Vision: Countering Systemic Disinformation
W stands for multiple principles according to Zeiter, who departed her role as eBay’s global Chief Privacy Officer after 11 years to lead the venture. “The W stands for We, but also Who, What, When, Where, and Why,” she told a Davos audience. “The logo also consists of two letter Vs—standing for Values and Verification.” Zeiter framed the platform as necessary to counter systemic disinformation eroding public trust and weakening democratic decision-making.
The platform requires photo verification of users before participation, explicitly prohibiting anonymous accounts and automated bots. All user data will be stored on European servers owned by European companies, with the platform permanently structured to remain under European ownership through safeguards preventing sale to non-European buyers. W falls under EU digital and data protection regulations enforced by national authorities.
The Rentzhog Connection and Funding Questions
W operates as a subsidiary of Stockholm-based We Don’t Have Time, the climate activism social network founded by Ingmar Rentzhog in 2017. Rentzhog gained prominence in 2018 when he publicized Greta Thunberg’s school strike on its first day, posting viral content that helped launch her to international fame. Rentzhog told reporters from Davos that geopolitical tensions pushed him to accelerate W’s development: “Geopolitics has gone completely crazy recently, so we decided to bring the plan forward.”
The Thunberg relationship proved controversial in 2019 when Svenska Dagbladet revealed We Don’t Have Time used Thunberg’s name 11 times in promotional materials for a share issue without informing her family, raising approximately SEK 10 million. Thunberg severed ties with the organization, stating on Facebook that they used her name “in a part of their organization that is a start-up venture” without her or her family’s knowledge. Rentzhog issued an apology, though critics questioned whether his latest venture would repeat similar promotional tactics.
When asked about W’s resources to challenge X, Zeiter told reporters the company secured funding through the rest of 2026 with plans for a larger funding round later in the year, declining to disclose specific capital raised. The team includes executives with experience from similar companies, though the small startup faces competition from X’s 500+ million daily users and entrenched network effects.
| Feature | W | X (Twitter) |
|---|---|---|
| User Verification | Mandatory photo ID for all | Optional paid verification |
| Anonymous Accounts | Prohibited | Allowed |
| Data Location | Europe only, European servers | Global infrastructure |
| Ownership Structure | Permanently European | US-based (Elon Musk) |
| Regulatory Framework | EU DSA/GDPR native | Compliance under protest |
Community Reactions: Skepticism Dominates
Social media reactions to W’s announcement ranged from skeptical to openly hostile. Critics predicted censorship would limit discourse to innocuous topics. One observer stated: “Given how much censorship there is in Europe, on the European network there will be posts only about cat food and flowers. If you say something about Brussels or the government, you are immediately censored.”
Others challenged the framing that “Europe” was launching the platform. “Enough with the speculation, it’s not ‘Europe is starting’ but ‘European organizations are starting’ there’s a difference,” noted one commenter, highlighting that W represents private initiative rather than EU institutional backing. The platform announcement coincided with 54 members of European Parliament calling for European alternatives to X, which they argued is “no longer an open and balanced tool for political communication or journalism” following Elon Musk’s takeover.
The government-controlled media comparison emerged repeatedly in discussions. One critic wrote: “A social media platform / online public square controlled and censored by the govt. Yes that should work well for controlling and propagandising the masses. If I remember correctly there’s some countries that do this with there media tv/papers. We call that something.” The comparison drew parallels to state-controlled social platforms in authoritarian regimes despite W being privately operated.
More nuanced responses acknowledged X’s problems while questioning W’s solution. “People laughing about this concept do not understand what’s fundamentally wrong with X. Not saying that W sounds like a good idea as a project, but reading the comments pretty much shows that people don’t get the point,” argued one defender, suggesting criticism missed legitimate concerns about misinformation and platform accountability.
Regulatory Context: EU vs. Big Tech
W’s launch coincides with escalating friction between Brussels and US tech platforms. X was recently fined €120 million under the Digital Services Act, prompting Musk to call for the bloc’s abolition. The timing also overlaps with heightened US-Europe geopolitical tensions driven by Trump’s Greenland statements and proposed European tariffs.
European regulators have repeatedly pointed to anonymous and automated accounts as drivers of coordinated disinformation, particularly during elections and geopolitical tensions. Identity verification has been discussed as increasing accountability online. However, critics argue mandatory verification discourages whistleblowers, activists, and others depending on anonymity for protection — creating tension between accountability and free expression.
Technical Implementation and Timeline
W plans a February 2026 beta release for 1,000 specially appointed expert users who will test the platform and recommend improvements. In summer 2026, the company will announce media partnerships, followed by full public release toward year end. According to Novinite, the platform allows users to choose how feeds are curated — from staying within familiar networks to seeing broader spectrums of posts—attempting to reduce filter bubbles and misinformation spread.
The verification-first model differs fundamentally from established social networks. Users must verify identity before participating, with the platform using photo validation to ensure accounts represent real humans matching their claimed identities. Data will be stored decentrally across European infrastructure rather than centralized US-based servers, addressing sovereignty concerns that have troubled EU regulators for years.
The Viability Question
W faces enormous challenges competing with X’s scale, network effects, and entrenched user habits. Social networks derive value from user base size—a platform with 1,000 beta users offers dramatically less utility than one with 500 million daily active users. Mandatory verification creates friction that competitors don’t impose, potentially limiting growth among users valuing privacy or requiring anonymity for legitimate reasons including journalism, activism, or whistleblowing.
Previous European social media alternatives haven’t achieved meaningful scale. Platforms like Mastodon gained attention during X controversies but failed to sustain momentum beyond niche communities. Network effects create winner-take-most dynamics in social media, making displacement of incumbents extraordinarily difficult without compelling differentiation or regulatory intervention forcing migration.
For public institutions, verified platforms offer practical advantages including reduced impersonation risk and clearer accountability for official communications. Early institutional adoption could establish legitimacy and trust, particularly in regulatory and policy circles. However, broader adoption depends on whether W attracts sufficient users to create the network effects that make social platforms valuable.
What Success Would Require
W’s success likely depends on factors beyond its control. Regulatory pressure forcing X to modify operations or exit European markets could create opening for alternatives. Continued deterioration of X’s content moderation and user experience could drive migration. Government and institutional adoption providing anchor tenancy could bootstrap network effects. Major media partnerships lending credibility and content could attract initial user bases.
However, history suggests verification-first, values-driven platforms struggle against incumbents optimizing for growth and engagement. Truth Social, Parler, Gettr, and other politically-motivated alternatives failed to achieve sustainable scale despite initial enthusiasm. Even Threads, backed by Meta’s resources and Instagram’s 2 billion users, has struggled to become a true Twitter replacement despite early adoption spikes.
W positions itself not as replacement but as alternative—a more modest goal that acknowledges network effects make total displacement unlikely. Whether enough Europeans frustrated with X’s direction will migrate to a verification-mandatory, EU-regulated platform to create sustainable network effects remains the central question determining W’s viability beyond 2026.
Follow us on Bluesky, LinkedIn, and X to Get Instant Updates
