Should Lambeth Council worker Sam Masters have been forced to apologise in Twitter 'napalm' row?

I make no apology for voicing my support for media relations officer Sam Masters who today became the latest victim of the worrying trend of social network censorship.

A, now former, press officer at Lambeth Council, he has found himself without a job after joking that the best way to support Streatham High Road was to use napalm.

What he actually said was: “Having spent a considerable amount of time in Streatham, my solutions for supporting the High Road mostly involve napalm.”

Now, let me be clear. I don’t agree with the use of chemical warfare in South London.


But then I don’t think Mr Masters does either, which makes this whole sorry affair all the more ludicrous.

It was not long before this sarcastic, maybe misjudged, comment had evoked the ire of the social network police, brandishing torches and pitchforks.

 The army of got-nothing-better-to-do demanders of censorship must have thought they stuck gold when they unearthed this shiny nugget, and it was not long before they were demanding his head on a plate.

Chairman of the Streatham Business Board, Lee Alley,  said he planned to lodge a formal complaint with the council over Mr Master’s comments - oh come on Mr Alley.

I found myself involved in a twitter debate sparked by this incident, which Mr Alley was part of. 

Before long I was arguing against calls for Mr Masters to publicly apologise while fending off accusations  that “journalists assume the moral high ground”.

Actually I don’t. I am just fiercely defensive of our freedom to voice opinion without this ever growing threat of reprisal.

Mr Masters did apologise, erroneously in my opinion because he had absolutely nothing to apologise for.

In a letter to the Streatham Guardian, the former south London journalist said he was “genuinely sorry” for what he saw as a “silly joke”.

Sam, that’s all it was, a joke. Don’t be bullied into apologising. Defend your right to say what you want, even if others disagree.

The council insisted he had taken the decision to leave himself, and had neither been sacked nor resigned.

A spokesman said: “Sam was a freelancer on a daily rate and has chosen to pursue other opportunities.”

In the United Kingdom we have a democratic right to freedom of speech, as long as it does not break the laws of libel, contempt of court or incite racial hatred, violence etc.

Mr Masters did none of the above.

He fell foul of the twitter police, hell bent on making us fearful of speaking our minds freely.

Our democratic right is slowly being eroded away by those with their own sinister agenda, usually wielding the sword of racism to silence those whose opinion they dispute. 

Do I agree with Mr Master’s comment? No, and it is not something I would have said.

Do I defend his right to make it without fear of persecution? Absolutely.