Free speech is important within the constraints of a fair and equitable society. We discussed the use of a media for secure messaging between 2 people as opposed to general posting. In a similar way we discussed whether a barman should be prosecuted for allowing a racist discussion in a pub! I would state that context is important here – 2 people arguing in a pub may be similar to 2 people arguing on social media. However when the discussion moves to insurrection or rebellion the barman has a duty that is shared by social media (they can no longer hide behind technical difficulties – we know they can do it with their massive wealth). Both could and should be prosecuted for conspiracy or at least as an accomplice (harsh but see the last execution in England).
I guess this leads to questions about the broadcast media and programmes like Newsnight and phone-ins. The broadcasters have a bleep button they have to use on phone-ins and a responsibility to stop the rabid getting on air. TV programmes should also be able to be held to the same levels of law.
Have we become immune to extremist propaganda that pervades the printed media and increasingly TV and social media?