Internet Regulation:
Internet freedom has always been controversial, but now there's more pressure than ever to reform this law with profound consequences.
In the US, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act 1996 which was about keeping this new online world 'clean', but the US Supreme Court struck down most of its restrictions.
Section 230 (remained): "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
It originally protected bookshop owners, since they couldn't read everything they wouldn't be prosecuted. But it is the publishers who can be sued and therefore act as gatekeepers. Now, on the internet the barriers to publication would disappear. There would be not only no gatekeepers, but no gates.
Platforms from eBay to Facebook to Twitter to Google all rely on section 230, as it's the ultimate backstop that protects them from prosecution and is the ultimate reason why seemingly independent sovereign countries like the UK can't pass laws on their own to control or rein in these large tech giants.
Focuses:
- Online abuse
- Fake news/misinformation
- Extremist content
Like many of the big internet problems we struggle with, it's origins are in section 230, which treats online companies as platforms not publishers.
There is the case of Backpack.com, an online classified adverts site that was found by a Senate investigation to have knowingly run ads for children being trafficked for sex, but the law couldn't touch backpage because of Section 230.
"Do you acknowledge today for the record that child sex trafficking is a serious problem on Backpage?"
"After consultation with counsel I decline to answer your question".
People are already wanting to restrict the right to publish fake news - harmful content based on lies.
People have the right to speak their mind and no one can get into the business of censoring opinion. People can have wildly different opinions on the same event, but as long as that event is true and based on fact, it's fine.
Social media companies are increasingly under pressure to decide what's true and what's false; what's legal and illegal. But because of the sheer volume of content being uploaded onto the internet on a daily basis, it's impossible for internet providers to be able to effectively decide what's illegal and legal content.
In New Zealand:
On the 21st of September 2022, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced an initiative to research social media algorithms with French president Emmanuel Macron.
Algorithms used by social media companies to drive traffic and make money have long been shrouded secrecy. Critics argue they can radicalise people by pushing them into shadowy corners of the internet.
The initiative is backed by NZ, the US, Twitter and Microsoft, but is notably missing the giants Facebook and Google. The partners will build and test a set of privacy enhancing technologies. Once tested, replicated, and validated, the technologies could then be used to build infrastructure to support independent study of impacts of algorithms.
The software being developed would allow researchers to analyze and gain insight from datasets on a variety of different social media and other platforms without being able to directly view or access that data - providing privacy for the platforms' users.
This means research about algorithms - which currently is typically limited to looking at data from one or two platforms - would now be able to examine and compare data across several companies without risking users' privacy. The technologies would be available to the wider Christchurch Call network (a response to the livestreaming of the 2019 mosque shootings), if successful.
"Companies, governments, civil society, we will all benefit from this initiative. It will help us create the free, open and secure internet we are all driving for.
"If we can see true collaboration between tech companies, governments, civil society, academia and most importantly affected communities of online harm, we could get closer to eliminating the spread of terrorist and violent extremist content online."
"We hope that the government's review of the content regulatory system will help to find a new approach to content regulation that minimises the risk of harms caused by online content including online abuse and misinformation."
Comments
Post a Comment