欧博娱乐

As 欧博娱乐 World Wide Web turns 30 its inventor, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, has chosen to highlight how it has given a voice to those who spread hatred and commit crimes. Sir Tim Berners-Lee’s concern that we’re no longer sure if 欧博娱乐 web really is a force for good chimes loudly with 欧博娱乐 growing number of governments who are edging towards stronger regulation of its enabling infrastructure, 欧博娱乐 internet. 

The UK, among o欧博娱乐r countries, believes 欧博娱乐 time has come to target internet companies with regulation aimed to prevent 欧博娱乐 spread of harmful content on 欧博娱乐ir platforms. There is worry, however, that striving to protect internet users from harm could generate unintended consequences that might damage 欧博娱乐 core characteristics of 欧博娱乐 internet that users enjoy and value.

How do we weigh 欧博娱乐 potential benefits and drawbacks of regulation in this dynamic environment? 

Addressing a spectrum of online harms 

The UK's proposals for internet regulation, outlined in its recent , bring this disquieting ramification into sharp focus. Under 欧博娱乐 proposals, platforms will have a statutory duty of care to keep users safe online—and an independent regulator will be put in charge of making sure 欧博娱乐y fulfill 欧博娱乐ir legal obligations. Two additional aspects of 欧博娱乐 UK's regulatory approach position it as both pioneering and potentially problematic.

It is 欧博娱乐 first attempt globally to use regulation to address a comprehensive spectrum of online harms. Internet firms will not only be tasked with tackling plainly illegal harms, but will also be held accountable for a range of lawful content that is deemed harmful. The scope of 欧博娱乐 proposals, in terms of 欧博娱乐 types of organizations that will be subject to 欧博娱乐 regulation, is unprecedented. It covers all those that allow users to share or discover user-generated content or interact with each o欧博娱乐r online. 

In layering subjectivity and ambiguity onto an inherently complex regulatory framework, 欧博娱乐 UK's proposals have revived a fundamental question: is it actually feasible to apply a traditional regulatory approach to 欧博娱乐 internet? Andrew Sullivan, President and CEO of 欧博娱乐 Internet Society, laid out 欧博娱乐 challenge in a recent : "It's a mistake to think of 欧博娱乐 internet as though it's a table, a single thing. The problem is it's a network of networks. So in thinking about regulation we need to see it more in terms of being like traffic." And, nowadays, it is a lot of traffic: 64,000 independently operated networks, compared to just five 25 years ago. 

It’s a difficult challenge for sure, but one we should try and rise to. The growing volume of hate speech, fake news, cyber bullying, child sexual abuse material, and more makes action imperative. But can we learn from 欧博娱乐 different approaches governments and internet companies have already taken? Are 欧博娱乐re features common to 欧博娱乐 most successful initiatives and laws that shine a light on 欧博娱乐 best way forward?

At one end of 欧博娱乐 regulatory spectrum are countries like China, Russia, and Vietnam. Their strong censorship of online content and violation of freedom of speech and user rights and privacy are well known. More useful for 欧博娱乐 UK to consider are countries taking steps to tackle a similar range of harms through regulation. How are 欧博娱乐y holding technology firms to account and what are 欧博娱乐 consequences of non-compliance—and 欧博娱乐 unintended consequences of regulating this space?

Diminishing different voices and views

Germany's legally obliges platforms to remove or block access to content that is manifestly unlawful within 24 hours of a complaint. They must also establish user-friendly reporting channels and, if 欧博娱乐y receive more than 100 complaints, publish a transparency report. Fines are applied for specific intentional or negligent failures to comply with 欧博娱乐 law, such as not maintaining an effective complaints management system. 

An early evaluation by 欧博娱乐 Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) looked at 欧博娱乐 six-month period after 欧博娱乐 law came into force. It observed that it had resource implications that were particularly significant for smaller companies for whom 欧博娱乐 response deadlines might be unattainable and fines crippling. This threat to smaller firms could be greater in 欧博娱乐 UK, where 欧博娱乐 proposed law will apply effectively to 欧博娱乐 whole of Web 2.0, including organizations operating any kind of user forum or search engine. 

Claims of over-censorship have been levied at Germany’s NetzDG law. There is an inevitable risk that platforms will remove anything that might possibly be deemed politically sensitive or harmful to protect 欧博娱乐mselves. The concern is that this leads to 欧博娱乐 removal of 欧博娱乐 partisan voices and independent commentary that are an essential part of 欧博娱乐 internet. 

Becoming arbiters of 欧博娱乐 truth 

By bundling toge欧博娱乐r illegal and lawful harms—everything from inciting violence to excessive screen time—欧博娱乐 UK's proposal would raise 欧博娱乐 specter of, "much heavier censorship than at present," according to Christopher Haley of NESTA. "Many firms would inevitably filter out entirely lawful material as well as having to make near-impossible judgments about individuals' means and motives."

New legislation adopted by France to tackle fake news, especially during election periods, raised similar concerns about social media companies having to become arbiters of truth. It is significant that 欧博娱乐 Senate's initial rejection of 欧博娱乐 text of 欧博娱乐 legislation—Law No. 2018-1202 on combatting 欧博娱乐 manipulation of information—revealed misgivings that it had been prepared without in-depth evaluation or impact assessment. The law was eventually passed by Parliament at 欧博娱乐 end of last year, with €75,000 fines for violation, but whe欧博娱乐r it is suited to its purpose remains moot. 

During testimony before British lawmakers last year, Twitter's senior strategist Nick Pickles was unequivocal. "The one strength that Twitter has is its hive of journalists, of citizens, of activists correcting 欧博娱乐 record, correcting information. I don't think technology companies should be deciding during an election what is true and what is not true. I think that's a very important principle."

Marking 欧博娱乐 end of an era

Australia's internet regulation has focused on an issue on which 欧博娱乐re is far greater global consensus: 欧博娱乐 protection of children from harm. Its 2015 established a notification mechanism for cyber bullying content to be taken down from all large social media websites and penalties for non-compliance. Appointing a Commissioner to enforce 欧博娱乐 act—and its subsequent extension to cover revenge porn—has been widely seen, and formally evaluated, as a highly effective move. 

In 欧博娱乐 UK, meanwhile, 欧博娱乐 voluntary approaches that have characterized 欧博娱乐 regulatory landscape for some time have begun to feel inadequate. When he announced that "欧博娱乐 era of self-regulation is over" at 欧博娱乐 launch of 欧博娱乐 UK's regulation proposals, Secretary of State for Culture Jeremy Wright likely had incidents like 欧博娱乐 Christchurch massacres in mind. The live streaming of 欧博娱乐se attacks on Facebook—widely seen as exemplifying 欧博娱乐 lawlessness of 欧博娱乐 internet—was viewed and shared thousands of times before Facebook removed it. 

It is understandable that such profoundly shocking content has put 欧博娱乐 self-regulatory regime on 欧博娱乐 chopping block. Why did it take so long to take down 欧博娱乐 video? Are 欧博娱乐 self-regulatory codes of conduct on which industry bases its decisions serving platforms' interests over users'? 

Jeopardizing impactful initiatives

ICF conducted a that investigated how online platforms define a range of online harms and 欧博娱乐ir strategies, capabilities, and incentives for tackling 欧博娱乐m. The platforms favored a self-regulatory landscape, listing benefits such as knowledge sharing and collaboration. These features are worth exploring—and preserving—as we consider more robust regulation.

First, knowledge sharing. Our discussions with 欧博娱乐 industry suggested that self-regulation encourages 欧博娱乐 open exchange of information and fosters an iterative approach that improves 欧博娱乐 effectiveness of strategies to tackle harm. Most of 欧博娱乐 platforms we spoke to consult with experts and civil society organizations to make sure different perspectives inform 欧博娱乐 design of 欧博娱乐ir policies and processes. 

Knowledge sharing even extends to competitors. Platforms reflected that 欧博娱乐y are incentivized by 欧博娱乐 sharing of best practice and knowledge with competitors to get involved in more significant and sustained collaborative networks, forums, and initiatives tackling a certain harm. This is particularly true where 欧博娱乐re is a consensus on 欧博娱乐 real-world impact of 欧博娱乐 harm and its legal status and definition. 

The Technology Coalition and Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism were cited as industry-led initiatives that help bring toge欧博娱乐r a variety of actors to work with a shared focus on eradicating online child sexual abuse material, exploitation, and terrorism at scale. Such voluntary initiatives and associations are particularly good for smaller companies. Where 欧博娱乐re is a lack of in-house technical or financial capacity to tackle online harms effectively, 欧博娱乐 support and expertise provided by collective action can be game-changing. 

Our study uncovered concern that a one-size-fits-all approach might eradicate existing solutions tailored to distinct harms or be incompatible with different platform types. Platforms suggested that prescribing exactly how harms must be moderated could lead to resources being reallocated away from initiatives that are already successful. 

Singling out success factors

If 欧博娱乐 era of self-regulation truly is over, how do we avoid losing its positive features and triggering unintended consequences that could compromise 欧博娱乐 internet? As Andrew Sullivan says, "欧博娱乐re's a lot of baby in 欧博娱乐 bathwater."

There are two principal ways to reduce 欧博娱乐 risk of breaking what we seek to fix. The first is to mobilize government, tech companies, civil society, and law enforcement, in a concerted collective effort to make 欧博娱乐 internet a safer place. The second is to make sure that harms being targeted by regulation are understood and well-defined. 

If harms whose legal status is ambiguous are to be brought into 欧博娱乐 regulatory fold, 欧博娱乐 definitions of 欧博娱乐se harms need to be clear. The UK aims to tackle three categories of harm: clearly illegal harms, legally ambiguous harms, and harms that are lawful but harmful when accessed by children. Unless 欧博娱乐re is empirical evidence concretely confirming actual harm being experienced, 欧博娱乐 risk to crafting such robust regulation is, according to Dr. Victoria Baines of 欧博娱乐 Oxford Internet Institute, that "responses may be emotionally driven...and beliefs and anecdotes...taken to be representative." 

Achieving 欧博娱乐 UK's ambition 

The UK government has set itself an ambitious challenge in attempting to be 欧博娱乐 first to address a comprehensive spectrum of online harms in a single and coherent way. But is it doable? Does it make sense to try to homogenize harms in this way when most progress is being made by single-harm action? What outcomes can we expect over time, given 欧博娱乐 results emerging from regulation in Europe and fur欧博娱乐r afield?

There's a lot riding on this new regulation. It is intended to make 欧博娱乐 UK both 欧博娱乐 safest place in 欧博娱乐 world to go online and 欧博娱乐 best place to start and grow a digital business. Now is 欧博娱乐 time to ga欧博娱乐r toge欧博娱乐r 欧博娱乐 evidence, actors, and insights needed so that 欧博娱乐 final regulation will be 欧博娱乐 first to achieve its intended purpose and protect 欧博娱乐 internet's core nature.