What about if the speech involves inciting violence? Is there a line that is drawn?

I think there’s probably an argument in there that those services are so curated by their algorithms that it’s not so easy as people filtering what they read, especially users not so well educated in how those platforms shape the window they look through.

Funny thing is, it’s likely the people who never went looking for Jones saw less of him than the people who did.

Maybe the people looking for his kind of messaging were just waiting for a note like “ready your guns”.

And again maybe the real danger lies in the ones who are on the edge of that and start getting hints of it and what’s more, increasingly fall prey to it and so seek it out more and their curated window is all the more filled with it. Suddenly you have large swathes of people believing that the end is nigh, Obama is a reptile, men are under attack, and it’s time to ready their rifles against their neighbour.

More should probably be questioned about the curation process those companies employ.

Personally, I think there's a some sort of line there where you have to use some sense and say this person shouldn't be allowed to say or use our platform. There's got to be a line somewhere for hateful, terrible people. It's not about different viewpoints or opinions when you get to the point of something like White Nationalists or Islamic fundamentalists.

I don't think they should be arrested or put in jail but what's the harm in booting some awful people? I know someone will respond to "what happens when they disagree with what you say"? Yeah, that could happen and I get pissed and life goes on. People get banned daily from all the platforms for really dumb things. Hell, you can't even have a female nipple on Instagram.

He can speak all he wants to. No one stopped him from publishing on his own website.