Grossly Offensive Posts: What UK Law Actually Says

Social media users can potentially face criminal prosecution in the UK over messages posted online, even when a comment is published openly rather than sent directly to another person.

One piece of legislation that can apply is Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, which covers certain communications sent through a public electronic communications network.

The legislation has recently attracted renewed attention in the North East after former Reform UK councillor Glenn Gibbins appeared in court charged with an offence under the Act relating to a social media post. He has pleaded not guilty and the allegation against him remains to be determined by the court.

But what exactly is a Communications Act 2003 offence, when can something posted on social media become a criminal matter and how offensive does a message have to be before it potentially crosses the legal threshold?

What is Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 creates offences involving certain communications sent through a public electronic communications network.

The legislation states that a person can commit an offence if they send a message or other matter that is "grossly offensive" or of an "indecent, obscene or menacing character".

This does not mean that every offensive, controversial or unpleasant social media comment constitutes a criminal offence.

That distinction is particularly important. Crown Prosecution Service guidance makes clear that the threshold for criminal prosecution is high and that a communication being offensive or in bad taste does not automatically make it "grossly offensive" for the purposes of Section 127. (cps.gov.uk)

Can the Communications Act apply to social media.

Yes. Despite the Communications Act becoming law in 2003, before today's major social networks became part of everyday life, Section 127 can apply to communications made over the internet.

The CPS states that the internet constitutes a public electronic communications network. Communications made through social media platforms using the internet can therefore potentially fall within Section 127. (cps.gov.uk)

A common misconception is that an offensive message must be privately sent to another person before an offence can potentially occur.

That is not necessarily the case.

CPS guidance says a social media post can amount to "sending" a communication for the purposes of Section 127. Prosecutors also do not necessarily need to establish that a particular individual actually received the communication.

Public posts can therefore potentially be covered by the legislation.

What does 'grossly offensive' actually mean.

This is one of the most important parts of Section 127 and also one of the areas most likely to cause confusion.

The Communications Act does not provide a simple statutory definition of "grossly offensive".

Instead, courts must consider the communication itself and the context in which it was made.

CPS guidance emphasises that prosecutors must distinguish between communications which are merely offensive and those capable of crossing the much higher threshold required for criminal prosecution.

Something being in poor taste, insulting or even "shockingly bad taste" is not necessarily enough by itself. (cps.gov.uk)

Context can therefore become crucial.

Factors surrounding the message, the people or groups it concerns, the circumstances in which it was published and how the communication would reasonably be understood can all become relevant when deciding whether the threshold has been reached.

What does the prosecution have to prove.

A prosecution does not simply involve demonstrating that members of the public found a post offensive.

For an allegation involving a grossly offensive communication, prosecutors must establish the elements of the Section 127 offence beyond reasonable doubt.

CPS guidance says the required state of mind is also important.

For grossly offensive messages, the prosecution must establish that the sender intended the message to be grossly offensive to those to whom it related, or was aware at the time of sending it that a reasonable member of the public might regard the communication as grossly offensive. (cps.gov.uk)

That means both the content of the communication and the circumstances in which it was sent can become important evidence in a criminal case.

What about freedom of speech.

Freedom of expression remains an important consideration when authorities investigate potentially offensive communications.

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects freedom of expression. That protection can extend to speech which other people regard as offensive, disturbing or controversial.

It is not, however, an unlimited right.

CPS guidance specifically warns prosecutors that criminal proceedings involving communications can interfere with freedom of expression and therefore require careful consideration. Prosecutors must assess whether pursuing a case is necessary and proportionate. (cps.gov.uk)

This is another reason why simply causing offence does not automatically mean that a criminal offence has been committed.

How does racism affect a Communications Act case.

Racially offensive communications have previously been considered by courts dealing with Section 127.

One of the leading cases referenced in CPS guidance is DPP v Collins, which concerned racially offensive telephone messages.

The case established important principles surrounding the meaning of "grossly offensive". The assessment involves considering the standards of an open and just multi-racial society and whether the message is liable to cause gross offence to those to whom it relates. (cps.gov.uk)

However, racist or discriminatory subject matter does not remove the prosecution's obligation to prove the elements of the particular criminal offence.

Each case must still be determined on its own evidence and circumstances.

Can sharing someone else's post cause problems.

Section 127 is not necessarily limited to the person who originally created a message.

CPS guidance states that forwarding or sharing another person's communication can potentially constitute sending a communication for the purposes of the legislation. (cps.gov.uk)

Whether an offence has actually been committed will depend on the individual circumstances, including the content, context and required state of mind.

It means social media users should not automatically assume that reposting material created by somebody else removes all potential legal responsibility.

How common is social media use in the UK.

The potential application of communications law has become increasingly significant because of the enormous role social media now plays in everyday life.

Ofcom reported in 2026 that 89% of adult internet users use at least one social media platform, increasing to 97% among internet users aged 16 to 34. (ofcom.org.uk)

Separate Ofcom research found that UK adults spend around four and a half hours online per day on average. (ofcom.org.uk)

With millions of people communicating publicly every day, understanding where controversial speech ends and potentially criminal communication begins has become increasingly relevant.

For social media users in Newcastle and across the UK, the central point is that being offensive and committing a criminal communications offence are not automatically the same thing.

Section 127 establishes a specific legal threshold, and whether that threshold has been crossed ultimately depends on the evidence and circumstances of each individual case.

Share your thoughts below.

Is UK law tough enough on racist online posts?