A HISTORIC ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH
Critics warn crackdown on internet giants risks censorship ... but Javid says he MUST take action
A CRACKDOWN to force technology giants to remove harmful content could be a backdoor to totalitarian- style censorship, campaigners warned last night.
They said the shake-up unveiled yesterday by Home Secretary Sajid Javid and Culture Secretary Jeremy Wright was a ‘historic attack on freedom of speech’.
They said the Government should be ashamed of proposals that threatened the role of the Press and would see Britain ‘leading the Western world in internet censorship’.
But Mr Javid shrugged off the backlash and insisted he had to act because social media firms had been complicit in murder, abuse and crimes by failing to act against online dangers.
He said companies including Facebook, Google and Twitter had failed to ‘put their house in order’, leaving ministers with no option but to regulate.
Internet safety campaigners welcomed the move, claiming the technology giants had done too little to tackle child abuse images, online bullying, terrorist propaganda, revenge pornography and hate crimes.
But the proposals also cover harder-to-police areas such as cyber-bullying, trolling and the spread of fake news and disinformation.
Social networks must tackle material that advocates self-harm and suicide – ‘suicide porn’ which became a prominent issue after 14-year-old Molly Russell took her own life in 2017.
She had looked at distressing material about depression and suicide on her Instagram account.
Under the new regulations, which have gone out for consultation, any website which allows users to post content will have a legal ‘duty of care’.
The rules will apply to social media giants as well as smaller websites such as blogs and news and review sites.
Drawn up by the Home Office and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport the proposals will mean:
An independent watchdog will write a ‘code of practice’ for technology companies to follow;
Web firms must provide annual reports setting out the amount of harmful content on their platforms;
Civil fines of up to £20million, or 4 per cent of annual turnover, for firms that break the rules;
The worst offending websites would face being blocked by internet service providers;
Technology bosses must develop new ways to detect illegal content.
Launching the White Paper in London yesterday, Mr Javid said: ‘Social networks bring great joy and great comfort to a great many people, but we, as a Government and a society, we cannot ignore the fact that individuals and groups around the world are using them to facilitate, encourage and commit some of the most vile and abhorrent crimes.
‘We cannot allow the leaders of some of the tech companies to simply look the other way and deny their share of responsibility even as content on their platforms incites criminality, abuse and even murder. To be a bystander is to be complicit. And I am not prepared to let them stand by any longer.’
But the Government’s critics said the plans threatened freedom of speech and would hamper start-up firms.
Matthew Lesh of the Adam Smith Institute, a free market think-tank, said: ‘The Government should be ashamed of themselves for leading the Western world in internet censorship.
‘The proposals are a historic attack on freedom of speech and the free Press. At a time when Britain is criticising violations of freedom of expression in states like Iran, China and Russia, we should not be undermining our freedom at home.’
Mark Littlewood of the Institute of Economic Affairs, another free market think-tank, said: ‘These draconian regulations will do more harm than good, ushering in new levels of censorship and killing innovation along the way.
‘The threat of fines, or even prosecution, for chief executives if harmful material is posted on their platforms will radically alter the public’s ability to share content online.
‘Such extreme regulations will lead to the adoption of risk-adverse policies, resulting in a downturn for user experience, and more importantly, a crackdown on free speech.
‘Granting the UK Government power to dictate what content is or isn’t appropriate for people to see sets an extremely dangerous precedent.’
Dom Hallas, of the Coalition for a Digital Economy, said: ‘Everyone, including British startups, shares the goal of a safer internet – but these plans will entrench the tech giants, not punish them.
‘The vast scope of the proposals means they cover not just social media but virtually the entire internet – from filesharing to newspaper comment sections. It will benefit the largest platforms with the resources and legal might to comply.
‘There is a reason that Mark Zuckerberg has called for more regulation. It is in Facebook’s business interest.’
‘To be a bystander is to be complicit’