Former health secretary Wes Streeting has urged Prime Minister Keir Starmer to take immediate action against X and other social media platforms, alleging they have fueled social unrest and riots in Belfast. Streeting argues these companies should be held financially liable for the costs of rebuilding damaged infrastructure, while calling for criminal accountability for platform executives who knowingly host content inciting violence.
The UK government previously threatened to block X in the country following the spread of sexualized images generated by its Grok AI tool. That threat prompted the platform to disable the tool’s access via the Grok account and within the X interface.
Why the government is currently limited
Downing Street has stated that the response to online content remains under the jurisdiction of Ofcom, the UK’s media regulator. According to government spokespeople, this regulatory process means no new enforcement actions against platforms are likely for at least two months. While the Online Safety Act requires companies to remove illegal content, such as posts inciting violence, the first quarterly compliance reports from platforms like X are not due for several weeks.
The friction between Streeting’s demand for urgent intervention and Downing Street’s reliance on the current regulatory framework highlights a significant divide in political strategy. While the government prefers the established, albeit slower, enforcement path through Ofcom, Streeting’s proposal to hold platforms financially responsible for physical damage signals a push for a more aggressive, punitive approach toward tech companies that struggle to moderate inflammatory content.
Pattern of digital incitement
Streeting’s intervention follows a series of incidents where social media platforms, particularly X, have been accused of facilitating disorder. In Southampton, online posts incorrectly identified individuals involved in the arrest of Henry Nowak, who was handcuffed by police while dying. These posts included personal addresses and messages such as “Wanted: dead or alive.” Similar patterns were observed in Belfast, where content on X—including posts from the platform’s owner, Elon Musk—called for aggressive responses to a knife attack.
What happens next
The government intends to amend the Online Safety Act to mandate that social media firms remove inflammatory content more rapidly during civil crises. However, this legislative change must be laid before parliament for 40 days, meaning it cannot take effect until at least mid-July. If the government proceeds with these amendments, it could provide regulators with the tighter timelines necessary to address rapid-onset social tensions online.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Wes Streeting proposing for social media platforms?
Streeting has called for social media platforms to be held financially responsible for the costs of cleaning up and rebuilding areas affected by riots, and for executives at these companies to face potential criminal action for promoting dangerous content.
Why is the government not taking immediate action against X?
Downing Street has indicated that it is leaving enforcement to Ofcom under the existing Online Safety Act. Officials note that some platforms have already been fined, and they are backing the regulator’s current enforcement powers.
When will new government powers regarding inflammatory content take effect?
Proposed amendments to the Online Safety Act, which would require faster removal of inflammatory content during crises, will not take effect until mid-July at the earliest due to the requirement that they be laid before parliament for 40 days.
Do you believe that social media companies should be held financially accountable for the physical consequences of online incitement?
