Lucy Connolly’s racial hatred post did not break X rules

The wife of a Conservative councillor who was convicted for stirring up racial hatred on social media did not violate X’s rules with the post.

Lucy Connolly, a childminder from Northampton, has pleaded guilty to publishing a social media post intending to stir up racial hatred after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.

A few days after her post, X rejected a complaint from a user who flagged the message to it.

The social media giant did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The 41-year-old, whose husband Raymond Connolly is a West Northamptonshire councillor, had posted on 29 July calling for hotels housing migrants to be set on fire and for “mass deportation now”.

“If that makes me racist, so be it,” she added.

It came as disorder broke out at a number of locations across the country, with hotels containing asylum seekers attacked.

An X user, who did not want to be identified, described how they had alerted the platform to the now deleted post but had been rebuffed in an automated response.

They told the BBC: “I’m shocked and appalled. If they can ignore this clear-cut breach of their alleged rules of conduct and go against UK law, there is clearly a grave problem with their supposed moderation process.”

By Marianna Spring, disinformation and social media correspondent

This summer has brought into sharp focus the real-world consequences of what spreads on social media – and the disconnect, at times, between what breaks the law, and what breaks some social media sites’ rules.

X, formerly known as Twitter, has been under fire – because it was the place where disinformation and hate that fanned the flames of the riots spread rapidly. And there were accusations it allowed – and incentivised – these kinds of posts, something I investigated at the time.

Decisions made by X’s new owner Elon Musk, including about what kind of posts are allowed on the site, introducing paid-for blue ticks that offer users’ posts greater prominence and reinstating some accounts that had previously been banned, have all been scrutinised.

He has repeatedly reiterated his commitment to freedom of expression. He also has decided to directly wade into UK politics – and has continued to comment on the sentencing of some Brits for their posts online related to the riots.

This case is another example of where what’s allowed in the world of X is at odds with what’s allowed in the eyes of the law. It raises tricky questions for politicians and the UK’s regulator, Ofcom, looking to enforce a new Online Safety Act.

X hasn’t responded to the BBC’s previous requests for comment – and says online it protects and defends the users’ voice.

X’s rules explicitly prohibit “threats to inflict physical harm on others, which includes threatening to kill, torture, sexually assault or otherwise hurt someone”.

In response to the complaint, X emailed: “After reviewing the available information, we want to let you know our automated systems found that [Connolly’s X account] hasn’t broken our rules against posting violent threats. We know this isn’t the answer you’re looking for.”

The X user said they had previously flagged up concerning messages on the platform and had received similar responses.

“I’ve largely given up reporting now as I always get the ‘no violation’ response, despite clear breaches,” they added.

Last month, policing minister Dame Diana Johnson said tech firms “have an obligation now” to tackle material that incites violence.

It followed an open letter from media regulator Ofcom to social media platforms that said they should take action against such posts and not wait until Ofcom gets enhanced powers under the Online Safety Act.

The new rules, which will come into force in 2025, will compel companies to take “robust action” against illegal content and activity.

Under the act, tech firms could be fined up to £18m or 10% of their qualifying worldwide revenue, and senior managers could face criminal action.

The user who complained to X about Connolly’s post comes from the West Midlands but did not want to be identified because they feared trolling online.

“I have watched with dismay how racist rhetoric has flourished on the internet, across social media sites, spreading disinformation to deliberately stoke up division,” they said.

“I don’t think sites like X bear sole responsibility, but they play a significant role in the spread of disinformation and should, as a bare minimum, follow their own code of conduct.”

The owner of X, Elon Musk, took to the platform to comment on the previous conviction of a Northampton man who was jailed for copying Connolly’s message.

Tyler James Kay was sent to prison for 38 months after he admitted publishing the inflammatory posts calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.

The billionaire described Mr Kay’s conviction as “messed up” to his 196 million followers.

Connolly will be sentenced at Birmingham Crown Court on 17 October.