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.
