DPP says rude, shocking tweets shouldn't be prosecuted
New social media guidelines urge freedom of speech, but damaging 'trolls' may still end up in court

OFFENSIVE, shocking or rude comments posted on Twitter or Facebook shouldn't land people in court, new social media guidelines say.
As social media becomes an increasingly fraught battleground between what's appropriate and what's not, Keir Starmer, the director of public prosecutions, stepped in yesterday with a new set of legal guidelines.
They were inspired by the conviction in May 2010 of Paul Chambers, who joked on Twitter about blowing up Robin Hood Airport in South Yorkshire. His conviction for sending a "menacing" tweet drew widespread condemnation and was eventually quashed on appeal in July.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Starmer says a tweet or online message that is "bad taste, controversial or unpopular" might land you in hot water with your boss, but it shouldn't see you hauled in front of a magistrate. Neither should people be prosecuted just because an online comment is unpopular or unfashionable or may cause offence to specific communities or individuals.
Internet 'trolls' – those who post deliberately messages designed to offend – can escape prosecution if they "express genuine remorse" or take "swift and effective action" to "remove the communication in question or otherwise block access to it", says The Independent. A prosecution could also be avoided if the communication "was not intended for a wide audience, nor was the obvious consequence of sending the communication".
The new guidelines say that prosecutors should proceed with "considerable caution", and only take action when comments are grossly offensive and where it would be in the public interest to bring about a prosecution, The Times reports.
The DPP notes that "hundreds of millions" of messages are sent on social media every month and an offensive posting would have to pass a "high threshold" before authorities stepped in. Given the massive amount of communication taking place a more heavy-handed approach had the "potential for a chilling effect on free speech, and prosecutors should exercise considerable caution."
A clear distinction is drawn between messages that are offensive, indecent and obscene and those that are likely to be prosecuted, such as a message that amounts to "a credible threat of violence or a targeted campaign of harassment against an individual".
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Why does the U.S. need China's rare earth metals?
Today's Big Question Beijing has a 'near monopoly' on tech's raw materials
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
When did divorce begin?
The Explaine Couples have always split up, but the institution has undergone major changes over the years
By David Faris
-
What are your retirement savings account options?
The explainer The two main types of accounts are 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts (IRAs)
By Becca Stanek, The Week US
-
Meta on trial: What will become of Mark Zuckerberg's social media empire?
Today's Big Question Despite the CEO's attempt to ingratiate himself with Trump, Meta is on trial, accused by the U.S. government of breaking antitrust law
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
What does an ex-executive's new memoir reveal about Meta's free speech pivot?
Today's Big Question 'Careless People' says Facebook was ready to do China censorship
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
What's Mark Zuckerberg's net worth?
In Depth The Meta magnate's products are a part of billions of lives
By David Faris
-
Bluesky: the social media platform causing a mass X-odus
The Explainer Social media platform is enjoying a new influx but can it usurp big rivals?
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK
-
Pakistan 'gaslighting' citizens over sudden internet slowdown
Under the Radar Government accused of 'throttling the internet' and spooking businesses with China-style firewall, but minister blames widespread use of VPNs
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK
-
Threads turns one: where does the Twitter rival stand?
In the Spotlight Although Threads is reporting 175 million active monthly users, it has failed to eclipse X as a meaningful cultural force
By Keumars Afifi-Sabet, The Week UK
-
Is the AI bubble deflating?
Today's Big Question Growing skepticism and high costs prompt reconsideration
By Joel Mathis, The Week US
-
How social media is limiting political content
The Explainer Critics say Meta's 'extraordinary move' to have less politics in users' feeds could be 'actively muzzling civic action'
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK