Joy Hyvarinen, head of advocacy at Index on Censorship, discusses the UK government’s online harms white paper with Jim Gamble, CEO INEQE Safeguarding Group on BBC Radio Foyle’s Breakfast Show.
Hyvarinen said: “If you have a legal duty of care and then combine that with the possibility of very large fines and personal criminal responsibility for senior managers, you get a very strong incentive for online platforms to take the easy way out, and just remove and restrict lots and lots of content. If in doubt, censor — take it down. And that’s going to affect millions of normal internet users. “
The vast majority of senior local news journalists are concerned they do not have the resources to hold power to account in the way they once did, a new survey by the Society of Editors and Index on Censorship has revealed. Read the full article
On March 30, 2019, a Lebanese military court ruled that homosexuality is not a crimeand refused to prosecute four individuals accused of the ‘crime’. This landmark decision is the first case of a military court refusing to equate homosexuality with a crime, although there have been precedents in civilian courts.
“It’s very important that when you propose laws that will affect people on a very large scale, that it needs to be based on evidence and a thoughtful, careful approach because you can do a huge amount of damage,” Hyvarinen said.
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship has raised strong concerns about the government’s focus on tackling unlawful and harmful online content, particularly since the publication of the Internet Safety Strategy Green Paper in 2017. In October 2018, Index published a joint statement with Global Partners Digital and Open Rights Group noting that any proposals that regulate content are likely to have a significant impact on the enjoyment and exercise of human rights online, particularly freedom of expression.
We have also met with officials from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, as well as from the Home Office, to raise our thoughts and concerns.
With the publication of the Online Harms White Paper, we would like to reiterate our earlier points.
While we recognise the government’s desire to tackle unlawful content online, the proposals mooted in the white paper – including a new duty of care on social media platforms, a regulatory body, and even the fining and banning of social media platforms as a sanction – pose serious risks to freedom of expression online.
These risks could put the United Kingdom in breach of its obligations to respect and promote the right to freedom of expression and information as set out in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, amongst other international treaties.
Social media platforms are a key means for tens of millions of individuals in the United Kingdom to search for, receive, share and impart information, ideas and opinions. The scope of the right to freedom of expression includes speech which may be offensive, shocking or disturbing. The proposed responses for tackling online safety may lead to disproportionate amounts of legal speech being curtailed, undermining the right to freedom of expression.
In particular, we raise the following concerns related to the white paper:
Lack of evidence base
The wide range of different harms which the government is seeking to tackle in this policy process require different, tailored responses. Measures proposed must be underpinned by strong evidence, both of the likely scale of the harm and the measures’ likely effectiveness. The evidence which formed the base of the Internet Safety Strategy Green Paper was highly variable in its quality. Any legislative or regulatory measures should be supported by clear and unambiguous evidence of their need and effectiveness.
Duty of care concerns/ problems with ‘harm’ definition
Index is concerned at the use of a duty of care regulatory approach. Although social media has often been compared the public square, the duty of care model is not an exact fit because this would introduce regulation – and restriction – of speech between individuals based on criteria that is far broader than current law. A failure to accurately define “harmful” content risks incorporating legal speech, including political expression, expressions of religious views, expressions of sexuality and gender, and expression advocating on behalf of minority groups.
Risks in linking liability/sanctions to platforms over third party content
While well-meaning, proposals such as these contain serious risks, such as requiring or incentivising wide-sweeping removal of lawful and innocuous content. The imposition of time limits for removal, heavy sanctions for non-compliance or incentives to use automated content moderation processes only heighten this risk, as has been evidenced by the approach taken in Germany via its Network Enforcement Act (or NetzDG), where there is evidence of the over-removal of lawful content.
Lack of sufficient protections for freedom of expression.
The obligation to protect users’ rights online that is included in the white paper gives insufficient weight to freedom of expression. A much clearer obligation to protect freedom of expression should guide development of future regulation.
In recognition of the UK’s commitment to the multistakeholder model of internet governance, we hope all relevant stakeholders, including civil society experts on digital rights and freedom of expression, will be fully engaged throughout the development of the Online Harms bill.
“The government is under public pressure to be seen to be doing something about this problem,” Hyvarinen said. “The implications for ordinary internet users have not been considered. If you introduce a duty of care, especially in combination with the risk of fines, it creates a very strong incentive for online platforms to remove and restrict content, and this is really going to impact on free speech rights and the right to information for millions of ordinary internet users in the UK, and it’s also going to set an example internationally.”
New research has revealed the vast majority of local newspaper editors are worried their titles now no longer have the resources to hold power to account on their patches. A study carried out by Index on Censorship magazine, in conjunction with the Society of Editors, has found the overwhelming majority of news chiefs are concerned about their ability to ensure local politicians are held accountable for their actions. Read the full article.
Today, Silicon Valley is facing the backlash. Amid widespread concerns over fake news, influence campaigns, cybersecurity and the sharing of violent and extremist content, more and more countries are pushing to rein in big tech. Read the full article
The UK is set to unveil new measures against the spread of harmful and violent content on the internet. The Online Harms white paper, set to be released on Monday morning by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, introduces a new independent regulator for social media companies, file hosting sites, and other companies which host content. Read the full article
Guy Muyembe of the Digital Activism Award-winning Habari RDC at the 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards (Photo: Elina Kansikas)
In December 2018, when Index on Censorship last spoke to Habari RDC, the 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Award Fellow for Digital Activism, the Democratic Republic of Congo was gearing up for an election that would name a successor to president Joseph Kabila, who had been in power since 2001.
The election, which took place on 30 December 2018, led to much confusion over who has won and the Regulator of Media for Congo forbid the press from publishing provisional results of the election. However, exit polls inevitably began circulating following the vote, causing various candidates and their supporters to claim the win.
“Alliances between political parties are in the process of being reorganised and we do not really know who the opposition is and who is in power,” Guy Muyembe, president of Habari RDC, told Index. “We will probably have until the end of the year to know the identity of each other.”
On the day after the election, authorities in Congo shut down the internet and disrupted SMS services under the guise of tackling fake news. Social media companies were blocked, and Habari RDC’s internet service provider, DHI Telecom, made clear that they had cut Habaris’ connection because their content was deemed to be dangerous.
The shutdown ended on 19 January 2019 and cost the country and its people millions of dollars in revenue.
Although Habari, like many in the Congo, was greatly impacted by the internet shutdown, they had measures in place to ensure they could operate in some capacity. “We have always made sure that our work is not 100% dependent on the internet connection. There are several offline activities where young people from lower-income neighbourhoods take part,” Muyembe said.
When elections are surrounded by doubt, it can be difficult to sift through all of the information and find the facts. Habari makes it a priority to always ensure what they publish is relevant and true.
“We avoid jumping on everything that is published here and there on social networks. Our luck is that we are not a news media outlet,” said Muyembe. “So we take our time to analyse and verify that the information in our possession is accurate.”
Launched in 2016, Habari is a collective of more than 100 young Congolese bloggers and web activists who give voice to the opinions of young people from all over the country. As a group of young Congolese bloggers working in a country where the majority of the population is also young, their work often focuses on issues concerning and relevant to the Congolese youth.
“Reports from various organisations show that more than half of the population is under 30 years of age. So we have to consider them if we want development tomorrow,” said Muyembe.
This year is a busy one for Habari as they work to ensure that youth issues and concerns are both heard and addressed by policymakers in the DRC.
“Habari will organise two programmes each year in partnership with organisations like the I’Institut Français: Facing young people — a moment of exchange between the authorities and young people on issues of general interest; and CaféBlog — a workshop of exchange and training on issues related to the use of the internet and social networks,” said Habari.
As for the future of the Congo, despite a rocky beginning to the year, Habari is hopeful that change is taking place, which will allow for greater freedom of expression in the future.
Muyembe points out that there are things being done now that were not seen during Kabila’s time as president or pre-Kabila. For example, the public radio and television channels now occasionally broadcast activities of those who are not favourable to those in power.
“We must do everything possible so that Congolese society becomes more democratic and allows several contradictory voices to express themselves,” said Muyembe.
Habari has benefited greatly from their position as Index fellows, Muyembe added, as they’ve grown from a locally known organisation to an internationally recognised organisation. They will work with Protection International for a training session in order to help improve the security issues for their bloggers.
As a result of Habari RDC working with Index, “it was easier for it to fit into the landscape of Congolese organisations both in the youth sector and online media. Secondly, it allowed us to network with organisations from other countries to meet future challenges,” said Muyembe.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1554715549345-45e11f03-8d2c-7″ taxonomies=”10735″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
The UK government is taking a hard line when it comes to online safety, moving to establish what it says is the world’s first independent regulator to keep social media companies in check. Read the full article
We are currently working hard to ensure that our new website is in perfect working order so we can continue to bring you the latest news, views and content from around the world. You may find that some pages are currently offline or that you are unable to find something that you are looking for. This is only temporary - and we apologise for any convenience this may cause.
Please consider subscribing to our weekly newsletter below, so that you are among the first to hear from our contributors and don't miss anything in future.
Thanks for your understanding.
?
STAY INFORMED.
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
?
SUPPORT OUR WORK
Index on Censorship’s work is only possible because of donations from people like you.
Please consider chipping in to help us give a voice to the voiceless:
