The Washington Post reports concerns over a clamp down on social media users in the UK following the Woolwich murder:
For at least a half-dozen users, their comments landed them in jail. Acting on complaints from outraged members of the public, British authorities slapped charges of “malicious communication” on the worst offenders.
It seems unlikely to me that anyone would be in jail over this, at least not so promptly. Here’s a report of two men being arrested but then released on bail. This further report gives details of eleven arrests. It’s important to note that one man, Benjamin Flatters, is also facing charges relating to drugs and soliciting under age girls for sex.
It’s very difficult, without seeing exactly what was said and in what context, to know what to make of these arrests. I see plenty of very offensive stuff on the internet but I don’t generally think it should be banned, or people arrested. In some cases a more limited sort of control – for example banning someone from Twitter – would seem in order.
This quotation from the Mail article indicates some of the problems faced when trying to evaluate what is going on:
A police spokesman said: ‘Following the terrorist incident in Woolwich this week, Hampshire Constabulary is working closely with local partnership groups to safeguard all members of the community.
‘This includes monitoring social networking sites, and we will seek to arrest and prosecute anyone inciting hatred or violence online.’
Inciting violence is serious – but inciting hatred could mean almost anything. This is similarly problematic:
Superintendent Matt Goodridge said: ‘Surrey Police will not tolerate language used in a public place, including on social media websites, which causes harassment, alarm or distress.
Again, these are quite subjective terms – I assume the complaints are not frivolous, but one would have to know much more to be sure whether or not one felt that this should be a matter for the police. I still think it was appalling that people were not allowed to know on exactly what grounds Conway was sentenced to a year in prison for placing anti-Islam posters in his window. Without seeing – or at least having a detailed description – of the material, whether Conway’s posters or these latest tweets and messages – how can one begin to work out whether freedom of speech is under threat?
Recently commenters pointed out that threats were frequently made against people such as Pat Condell and Tommy Robinson. Obviously I think any threat should be treated fully seriously, whoever is involved. Some of the very nastiest comments I’ve seen on Twitter have been targeted at outspoken Muslim women. They get attacked, not surprisingly, from both sides.
