UK officials leaned on tech firms with blunt demands to erase speech that broke no rules.
CINDY HARPER
A series of internal emails from the UK government has revealed an aggressive push to monitor and suppress online posts deemed “concerning,” sparking alarm over creeping censorship under the banner of combating misinformation and community unrest.
The documents, shared by US Rep. Jim Jordan, paint a picture of state officials flagging lawful speech, pressuring tech companies to remove content, and targeting what they described as “concerning narratives about the police and a ‘two-tier’ system.”
One of the most widely circulated videos under scrutiny featured a street celebration in Manchester where participants waved Pakistani flags. Captioned “It looks like Islamabad but it’s Manchester,” the video, posted by Radio Genoa on X, amassed over 14 million views.
Government emails described this kind of footage as misleading or dangerous, with one note labeling it an example of content that is “shared out of context in order to incite fear of the Muslim community.”
Another email, dated August 3, 2024, acknowledged “significant volumes of anti-immigrant content” online and pointed to “concerning narratives about the police and a ‘two-tier’ system that we are seeing across the online environment.”
The correspondence shows government officials not only monitoring speech but actively collaborating with platforms to address posts, even ones not violating the law or even the platform’s terms of service.
Officials were asking for direct intervention. One message requested clarity from platforms about “what content you are seeing across your platform; and b) any measures you have taken in response.” A follow-up email urged platforms to act quickly, stating, “We’d be grateful if you could come back to us on those two points as soon as you are able to.”
In one particularly troubling exchange dated August 4, government officials flagged a video showing someone scrolling through a freedom of information request that referred to asylum seekers as “undocumented fighting age males.”
The email warned of “significant risks of these becoming violent” and insisted that the Trust and Safety team “assess” the content urgently, despite it consisting of publicly available information.
Emails repeatedly asked platforms to intervene on content that shaped narratives around immigration, asylum seekers, or police treatment. These requests did not simply target slurs or direct incitement but rather extended to content that officials feared might “mislead the reader” or “further a sense of division.”
The pressure campaign was highlighted by Congressman Jordan, who shared the documents, stating, “The British government tried to censor American speech.” He added, “The British government asked tech platforms to censor speech from Americans, including speech from journalists and a Member of Parliament.”
Referring to the involvement of the UK’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), Jordan argued, “The British government flagged ‘concerning’ content to Big Tech, asking that it be taken down.”
He continued: “The British government was targeting political speech and journalists. And it was doing it with American-made technology and American-based platforms.”
A Wall Street Journal headline was also shared in the context of these revelations, warning of a broader trend: “Europe’s Crackdown on Speech Goes Far and Wide,” with a subheading that read, “Loosely defined hate-speech laws and the rise of social media have led to zealous policing.”
The government emails acknowledged that the content being flagged wasn’t necessarily in breach of any particular rule but still sought its removal due to its “potential for further physical harm” or contribution to “exacerbating tensions.”
The publication of these messages is alarming but not surprising for free speech advocates who argue that governments should not be pressuring platforms to silence lawful speech, especially on topics as vital to public discourse as immigration policy, police conduct, and community tensions.
This article (UK Government Emails Reveal Push to Pressure Tech Platforms to Remove Lawful Speech on Immigration and Policing) was created and published by Reclaim the Net and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Cindy Harper
See Related Article Below
Exposed: Labour’s plot to silence migrant hotel critics
Emails reveal Whitehall ‘spy’ unit complaining to tech firms about content mentioning asylum seekers and two-tier policing
A secretive Whitehall “spy” unit has been used by the Government to target social media posts criticising migrant hotels and “two-tier policing”.
The Telegraph can reveal that officials working for Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary, have flagged videos with “concerning narratives” to social media giants including TikTok, warning that they were “exacerbating tensions” on the streets.
Emails recovered by a US congressional committee show that civil servants have complained to tech firms about content mentioning asylum seekers, immigration and two-tier policing.
The dossier has emerged as ministers battle claims that the UK is censoring social media with the Online Safety Act, including from allies of Donald Trump, the US president.
The disclosure reveals that members of the Government’s National Security and Online Information Team (NSOIT) complained about a series of posts that were critical of mass migration and asylum hotels in August last year during the Southport riots.
The team, based in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, was previously known as the Counter Disinformation Unit and was used during the Covid pandemic to monitor anti-lockdown campaigners.
The exchanges are likely to fuel claims that Labour is seeking to silence criticism over its continued use of asylum hotels.
Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to end their use by 2029 amid concerns that they are costing taxpayers £4m a day and causing tensions in communities.
The row over the hotels exploded again earlier this month when demonstrations broke out at a hotel in Epping after a migrant tried to kiss a teenager, with further protests on Thursday night
Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, has told the Cabinet the Government must take concerns about immigration seriously and do more to alleviate them.
However, one post flagged by the government unit with “urgency” included a photograph of a rejected Freedom of Information request about the location of asylum hotels, and a reference to asylum seekers as “undocumented fighting-age males”.
An unnamed civil servant warned there were “significant risks” of protests at migrant hotels becoming violent because of the posts and there was a “definite sense of urgency” about them in Whitehall.
The emails were sent on Aug 3 and 4 last year, the worst weekend of the riots, when protesters attacked asylum hotels across the UK. The violence spiralled after false claims circulated that the perpetrator of the Southport attack, in which three little girls were killed, was a Muslim asylum seeker.
The Government’s private exchange with TikTok came days before Elon Musk, the tech billionaire owner of X and a former ally of Mr Trump, criticised “two-tier Keir”. The phrase was echoed by Nigel Farage, who warned that police had created a “sense of injustice”.
In another email the same weekend, officials warned TikTok that users were posting about “two-tier” policing at Southport rallies, amid accusations that white protesters had been treated more harshly by the police than ethnic minorities.
It said: “I am sure you will not be surprised at the significant volumes of anti-immigrant content directed at Muslim and Jewish communities as well as concerning narratives about the police and a ‘two-tier’ system we are seeing across the online environment.”
Officials requested that TikTok explain “any measures you have taken in response…as soon as you are able to”.
A third example of “concerning content” flagged by the team was a video of Pakistani men celebrating on a street, posted on Aug 5 and captioned: “Looks like Islamabad but it’s Manchester”. The team claimed it had been shared “in order to incite fear of the Muslim community”.
The emails did not ask for the content to be removed, but requested that TikTok explained how it was dealing with it.
However, critics have said they amount to Government censorship of free speech online. The emails were revealed by Jim Jordan, chairman of the US House of Representatives’ judiciary committee, which issued a subpoena to TikTok to hand over messages “regarding the company’s compliance with foreign censorship laws”.
The Telegraph: continue reading
Featured image: Reddit
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply