And the pencil companies let people draw lewd drawings depicting minors. The typewriter manufacturers let a bunch of people write lewd stories depicting minors.

I decided to investigate these claims since it is frequently expressed by those attacking Elon or X. It seems to be yet another misrepresentation or falsehood spread around to achieve political gain.

I had ChatGPT investigate and summarize the report from CCDH it is based on. https://counterhate.com/research/grok-floods-x-with-sexualiz...

  "CCDH did not prove that X is widely distributing child sexual abuse material. Their report extrapolates from a small, non-random sample of AI-generated images, many of which appear to be stylized or fictional anime content. While regulators are rightly investigating whether Grok’s safeguards were insufficient, CCDH’s public framing collapses “sexualized imagery” and “youthful-looking fictional characters” into CSAM-adjacent rhetoric that is not supported by verified prevalence data or legal findings."

  “~3 million sexualized images generated by Grok”
  They sampled ~20,000 images, labeled some as sexualized, then extrapolated using estimated total image volume. The total image count (~4.6M) is not independently verified; extrapolation assumes uniform distribution across all prompts and users.

  “~23,000 sexualized images of children”
  They label images as “likely depicting minors” based on visual inference, not age metadata. No verification that these are real minors, real people, or legally CSAM.

  Implies Grok/X is flooding the platform with child sexual abuse material.
  The report explicitly avoids claiming confirmed CSAM, using phrases like “may amount to CSAM.” 
  Public-facing messaging collapses “sexualized anime / youthful-looking characters” into CSAM-adjacent rhetoric.

  Ties to the UK Labour Party: Several of CCDH’s founders and leaders have deep ties to Britain's center-left Labour Party. Founder Imran Ahmed was an advisor to Labour MPs.
  Target Selection: The organization’s "Stop Funding Fake News" campaign and other deplatforming efforts have frequently targeted right-leaning outlets like The Daily Wire, Breitbart, and Zero Hedge. Critics argue they rarely apply the same scrutiny to misinformation from left-leaning sources.
  "Kill Musk's Twitter" Controversy: Leaked documents and reporting in late 2024 and 2025 alleged that CCDH had internal goals to "kill" Elon Musk’s X (Twitter) by targeting its advertising revenue.

Where do you live where you're allowed to express yourself without any form of approval?

For instance, in the US, I cannot hysterically scream FIRE while running toward the exit of a theater, nor could I express a desire to cause bodily harm to an individual.

Not that I would, per se, but if I did I'd be liable to prosecution for the damages caused in either instance.

I'd have to get the approval of those involved (by their not seeking legal recourse), in order to do either without consequence.

FYI freedom of speech in the US sense is not so much about self-expression as much as it is to prevent e.g. the King decreeing a law that “nobody can say the word ‘Parliament’”. Or for a modern example, “discussing what to do about xyz group is ‘hate speech’.”

Anybody can run their mouths. Discussing ideas with others is what’s protected.

Sure — you just deny those same rights to anyone you deem a “fascist” in a secret report. Much like say, the Stasi would allow you to speak your mind unless you were a capitalist subversive, as clearly documented in your secret trial.

Obviously we should censor fascists and subversives!

nice alt, did you make it yourself?

> has largely been unchanged for 150 years. I really don't understand the recent outrage over these and other laws. We have been fine

The last 150 years of Germany have...ahem...not been what I would call "fine."

It would be interesting to have a replay of history without this law and similar ones related to it. Could be nothing different happens.

On the other hand, any law regulating speech is going to have a reverberating effect on the marketplace of ideas with 2nd and 3rd order outcomes that are impossible to disentangle after the fact.

Free speech in America is specifically about protecting you against the government. Your neighbor is still not allowed to defame you.

Huh? You're saying the German Chancellor does not represent the German government? [1] Large swathes of the CDU support it as well.

Macron was responding to criticism of the Digital Services Act, which contains censorship provisions for 'hate speech', which is repeatedly and routinely used by European nations to crack down on protected political speech. For example, it has been used as an excuse to censor political views leaning anti-immigration.

The UK in particular has used Ofcom as a weapon to target American companies that enable free speech communications, notably 4chan.

[1] https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/germanys-merz-calls-real...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/palestine-action...

Absolutely. There are several examples that are not calls for violence or unambiguous harassment that were documented by The Telegraph.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/15/hundreds-charged...

You didn't search very hard.

https://freedomhouse.org/country/united-kingdom/freedom-net/...

"Internet freedom declined in the United Kingdom during the coverage period due to a reported increase in criminal charges for online speech"

"A separate report from The Telegraph found that 292 people had been charged for spreading false information and “threatening communications” under the Online Safety Act between when it came into effect in 2023 and February 2025. Some civil liberties groups expressed concern that the laws were being applied broadly and in some cases punished speech protected by international human rights standards (C3)."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/15/hundreds-charged...

"Legal experts have also questioned the new rules. David Hardstaff, a serious crime expert at the law firm BCL Solicitors, said the fake news offence was “problematic both for its potential to stifle free speech if misused, but equally for its lack of clarity and consistency”."

This is a propaganda website funded by the EU.

That didn't answer my question.

Do you really not understand the sort of slippery slope that presents?

Wait, your operating theory on why the NSDAP became popular is because they... tricked everyone into hating jews?

You are not only entirely misunderstanding why the NSDAP appealed to people, you're also completely misunderstanding what post WWI Germany was - a republic hastily brought about with little care so that Woodrow Wilson would offer Germany peace based on his 14 points (he didn't). It was doomed to fail from the very beginning. If not the NSDAP it would have been some other extremists.

The idea that freedom of speech was what led to its downfall does not stand up to even the smallest scrutiny. Or the idea that an aged, pacified 2026 Germany would immediately return to 1930s Nazism if they had free speech is even more ludicrous.

Well they kinda did,long before the Nazis and der Sturmer put a torch on it.