Everything should be put in context and proportion but rarely is. That's why the law should remain as objective as possible and shouldn't get involved unless the speech declares an intent or incitement to physical violence or spills over into harassment.
Mason, this is different question to someone handing out physical copies of political material. The problem is that even after two+ decades of the internet, as a society we still haven't figured out how to manage behaviour on the internet. It's much easier to manage someone who acts like a c*** in public than someone who acts like a c*** on the internet. Poorly worded and poorly applied laws are not the solution.
What makes this case silly is that there is far more offensive material out there so the application of law here is seemingly arbitrary given that there was no threat of direct harm to anyone as a result of said video. That should concern everyone because in an increasingly polarised political environment vague laws can be used to single out individuals for legal sanction.