I am not a legal scholar. I am referring to the works of other legal scholars. People like Kent Roach and Craig Forcese have analyzed this, and we've based a lot of research on their research as well.
What it comes down to is that the way this is worded all depends on how you read the law. The law could be interpreted in such a way as to remove that motive. You look at it as, well, this journalist may not have been promoting what these terrorists are saying, but someone who's reading their communications may then be inspired to attack.