Not long ago, a message of "hoarding 'montmorillonite' to deal with gastrointestinal symptoms of XBB strain" appeared on the hot search. The reason was that the person concerned released a circle of friends to remind relatives and friends, which was widely spread after being screenshot, and finally made the drug "montmorillonite" out of stock overnight. Although the parties clarified that the text content in the circle of friends was personal understanding and speculation, the screenshots of the circle of friends had changed in the process of communication. Many people took the screenshots out of context and spread them widely in the network. After the incident, the party concerned said that he had taken notes at the local police station and received criticism and education from the police. Similar situations are by no means unique. Many sources of information come from social group chat and screenshots of friends circle. Therefore, false and untrue news, hot spot events, and random fabrications often occur, making it difficult for the majority of netizens to distinguish the true from the false, and some news has even caused bad effects. Where is the legal boundary for the Internet to consciously resist inappropriate speech on social platforms? The Cyber Security Law, which came into force on June 1, 2017, defines the types of online speech to be regulated: any individual or organization using the Internet should abide by the Constitution and laws, observe public order, respect social morality, and not endanger network security, and not use the Internet to endanger national security, honor and interests, incite subversion of the state power, overthrow the socialist system, incite division of the country, and undermine national unity, Propagandizing terrorism and extremism, advocating national hatred and discrimination, disseminating violence, obscene and pornographic information, fabricating and disseminating false information to disrupt economic and social order, and infringing on the reputation, privacy, intellectual property and other legitimate rights and interests of others. Yao Jinju, a professor at the Law School of Beijing Foreign Studies University, believes that the Internet is not a place outside the law, and the law respects and protects citizens' individual freedom of expression, but all Internet users should abide by the law and adhere to the bottom line of online freedom of expression. The public security organ has the right to deal with those who publish untrue and inappropriate statements on the Internet, deliberately distort the facts, fabricate and spread rumors, and disrupt social order according to law. If they cause adverse effects and serious circumstances, the police will investigate their legal responsibilities according to law. "Every citizen should be responsible for his/her own words and deeds on the Internet. I hope that every citizen and netizen can consciously resist inappropriate remarks, malicious attacks and other bad information, and not be credulous or forwarded. I hope that the majority of netizens can consciously abide by relevant laws and regulations, and jointly maintain a harmonious network environment." Yao Jinju called. Zhou Xuliang, director of Beijing Guanling Law Firm, believes that social media is not outside the law, and there are legal boundaries for speech. The laws that may be violated by improper network speech include the Civil Code, the Criminal Law, the Law on Public Security Management and Punishment, and the Law on Network Security. Zhou Xuliang reminded that we must pay attention to the fact that online speech should be based on facts, and should not be used to insult or slander others' personality, do not touch others' privacy, do not publicly publish others' unauthorized personal information and portraits, and do not endanger national security or disclose national secrets. In practice, the identification of specific acts needs to be based on the neutral judgment of judicial personnel, and the legal boundaries of online speech should be divided according to law through full benefit measurement. Liu Deliang, Professor of Law School of Beijing Normal University