Why the Online Harms Bill could be a game-changer
ONLINE ABUSE, or cyberbullying, has devastating consequences on people across society from prominent figures to children and marginalised groups.
Trolling can cause anxiety, a sense of hopelessness and, at its worst, suicidal thoughts.
The Courier’s and sister JPIMedia titles’ Call It Out campaign has called on social media platforms to take accountability seriously, sharing real-life experiences of online abuse suffered by people in Calderdale and beyond.
But online media platforms are faced with the challenge of holding perpetrators of bullying and hate speech to account, while protecting the right to free speech and difference of opinion, which is integral to a democratic society.
Paul Wragg, a professor of media law at the University of Leeds, is an expert on press regulation and free speech theory.
He explains that freedom of speech is a principle that applies in law, but not necessarily in the online world as social media companies have the right to sanitise their own platforms.
Prof Wragg said: “In law, freedom of speech is the right to say anything you like, subject to exemptions such as inciting hatred on the basis of a defining characteristic – such as race, religion, gender identity, disability or sexual orientation.
“The difficulty is that it requires the content itself to be an incitement of violence, but also to have an intention behind it – there’s no law to outlaw being racist, homophobic or unpleasant generally.
“The law is not intended to make people better, it’s intended to protect people from violence.
“The right to free CALL IT OUT: Our speech is one we campaign against trolling. hold against the Government, it doesn’t really apply in the online world.
“You can’t claim a right to free speech against Facebook, any more than I can claim the right to stand in someone’s house to have a discussion and have my voice heard.”
Charities such as the NSPCC are demanding that the Government makes Online Harms legislation a priority this winter.
The proposed Online Harms Bill will tackle trolling by making web publishers more responsible for user safety online, holding companies to account with UK law, if they fail to act against harmful content.
Prof Wragg said the legislation should focus on protecting victims of cyberbullying and removing content that causes profound physiological harm, rather than policing posts which may cause offence.
He said: “It’s important to differentiate the word harm from the word offence. I see lots of things that offend me – it upsets me that people have homophobic or racist views, I find that offensive because it clashes with my own values.
“However, there are things that genuinely will harm me, because they have a profound psychological effect.
“That may be because they relate to me personally, or because the images or messages are just so horrific I can’t unsee them – for example, a public beheading or images of child pornography.
“Those are the type of things that if I was to come across, I wouldn’t be able to get them out my head.
“What the Online Harms Bill should be doing, and the way it serves us best, is to regulate direct attacks on individuals that cause profound harm.
“This could be threats of violence, which the law already to some extent effects, but it can also be things that the law hasn’t quite got a grip on yet, like cyberbullying in more extreme cases.
“If it was to introduce liability for extreme cyberbullying that results in a profound psychological effect, when it causes suicidal thoughts for example, that’s where the Online Harms Bill can really serve the public.”
The Samaritans can be contacted free at any time of day or night, call 116123 or email jo@samaritans.org, or visit the website.
‘You can’t claim a right to free speech against Facebook, any more than I can claim the right to stand in someone’s house to have a discussion and have my voice heard.’
Prof Paul Wragg