Social media fines proposed

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube could face $200,000 fines for failing to take down “objectionable” content in a major proposal for dealing with digital harm in the wake of the March 15 terrorist attacks in Christchurch.

A civil fine is one aspect of a new bill, introduced by Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin, that would make social media platforms more responsible for the content they host in New Zealand.

Someone livestreaming content like the footage of the terror attack would also face criminal punishment.

But questions remain over how enforceable a fine would be, given that many of these online platforms are based offshore.

Currently the likes of Facebook and Twitter, under the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA), are not considered traditional publishers and are protected from legal liability under the “safe harbour” provisions of that law. But the new Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Amendment Bill would create a new position, “Inspector of Publications”, who could issue takedown notices for objectionable content.

Examples of such content, deemed “injurious” to the public good, include depictions of torture, sexual violence, child sexual abuse, or terrorism.

Failure to comply as soon as “reasonably practicable” could lead to a civil fine as determined by the District Court, of up to $200,000.

This is not as severe as similar laws proposed overseas, some of which allow for bigger fines (Australia) or include specific times for compliance, such as within 24 hours (Germany).

The new criminal offence for livestreaming objectionable content would be punishable by 14 years’ jail for an individual or a fine up to $200,000 for a company. However, a social media platform would not be criminally liable simply for hosting the livestreaming content, and the livestreamer could only be charged if they were in New Zealand.