The context of the scenario, the meme if you will, is that there is no fire. You're just shouting it for the fun of it, to see the crush of panicked bodies running just because you willed it. That is why it was used as an example of speech that is harmful.

Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...

The context of the scenario is you are a war protestor who's telling people they should resist the draft. Obviously protected political speech, which was outlawed using the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" argument.

Quite - the nature of the speech has to bear some resemblance to reality. There's people complaining about the crackdown on completely false mis-information that gets shared amongst right-wing circles that ended up causing the Southport riots. Clearly that's hate-speech that is aiming to incite violence and it's only fair that people should be held to account for that.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zshjs82

Except the official report stated something different.

Report here: https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/publications/pol...

The below from the FSU page:

> However, HMICFRS explicitly found “no conclusive or compelling evidence” that the disorder “was deliberately premeditated and co-ordinated by any specific group or network.” Most offenders were local, often young, and had no ties to extremism. The report also cites the Children’s Commissioner, who similarly concluded that conversations with those arrested “do not support the prevailing narrative… that online misinformation, racism or other right-wing influences were to blame.” Although ‘harmful’ online content may have circulated, the report acknowledges the causal factors were “more complex than were initially evident,” including longstanding social deprivation, loss of trust in policing, and generalised political disaffection.

Found via: https://freespeechunion.org/southport-riot-report-undermines...