 harms. This is a recipe for disaster. Ofcom has tended to be overzealous – particularly on trans issues and Covid – of the terms and conditions under its mandate to protect safety. Accordingly, the only rational response by Big Tech companies, to avoid the risk of large fines, will be to use automated systems to remove more content. Even worse, platforms like Elon Musk's Twitter could be prevented from embracing free speech. Collins has suggested that if social media firms 'water down' their terms and conditions it will 'lead to a response' from Ofcom. That effectively means a regulator, perhaps even independently of ministerial or parliamentary scrutiny, deciding what must remain in moderation policies. It is possible that Collins, who Sunak sacked from the ministerial ranks, is talking out of step. But it's important to add that even if Sunak does follow through with his commitment to remove the 'legal but harmful' provision, this will barely scratch the surface of the broader issues with the Online Safety Bill. The current version of the legislation has reached 230){kind=link}
Whatever reassuring language Sunak may use, the Bill still leans on the side of “if in doubt, censor”
The Online Safety Bill is taking on a zombie-like form, a corpse coming to haunt humanity from beyond the grave. Over the summer we were promised, by both Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, that the “legal but harmful” provisions would be removed to protect free speech. Last week, this commitment was reconfirmed in briefings to journalists. Today, however, we see reports that a former minister, Damian Collins, has suggested the provisions will remain in some mutilated form.
The legal but harmful duty, as currently drafted, will require Big Tech platforms to state in their terms and conditions how they will tackle “misinformation” and “hate speech”. Collins appears to be suggesting that while, following amendments, the platforms will no longer be told which categories of legal speech they must tackle, Ofcom will still be empowered to ensure platforms are enforcing their terms and conditions and tackling (legal) harms.
This is a recipe for disaster. Ofcom has tended to be overzealous – particularly on trans issues and Covid – of the terms and conditions under its mandate to protect safety. Accordingly, the only rational response by Big Tech companies, to avoid the risk of large fines, will be to use automated systems to remove more content.
Even worse, platforms like Elon Musk’s Twitter could be prevented from embracing free speech. Collins has suggested that if social media firms “water down” their terms and conditions it will “lead to a response” from Ofcom. That effectively means a regulator, perhaps even independently of ministerial or parliamentary scrutiny, deciding what must remain in moderation policies.