LockerK
March 21, 2019, 8:53pm
1353
Burn Facebook to the ground.
Loyalty to an influencer definitely justifies a riot.
I thought for sure that was an article from The Onion.
Nesrie
March 23, 2019, 5:46pm
1356
YouiTube gangs. Just what we needed.
Oghier
March 23, 2019, 6:00pm
1359
We are so hardwired for tribalism. We even form identities around which freaking youtubers we prefer, then resort to violence against out-groups.
Read Homo Sapiens.
Yes we are tribalistic. Very much so.
UK publishes white paper on regulating online platforms.
The government will establish a new statutory duty of care to make companies take more responsibility for the safety of their users and tackle harm caused by content or activity on their services.
Compliance with this duty of care will be overseen and enforced by an independent regulator.
All companies in scope of the regulatory framework will need to be able to show that they are fulfilling their duty of care. Relevant terms and conditions will be required to be sufficiently clear and accessible, including to children and other vulnerable users. The regulator will assess how effectively these terms are enforced as part of any regulatory action.
The regulator will have a suite of powers to take effective enforcement action against companies that have breached their statutory duty of care. This may include the powers to issue substantial fines and to impose liability on individual members of senior management.
Companies must fulfil the new legal duty. The regulator will set out how to do this in codes of practice. If companies want to fulfil this duty in a manner not set out in the codes, they will have to explain and justify to the regulator how their alternative approach will effectively deliver the same or greater level of impact.
Reflecting the threat to national security or the physical safety of children, the government will have the power to direct the regulator in relation to codes of practice on terrorist activity or child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA) online, and these codes must be signed off by the Home Secretary.
For codes of practice relating to illegal harms, including incitement of violence and the sale of illegal goods and services such as weapons, there will be a clear expectation that the regulator will work with law enforcement to ensure the codes adequately keep pace with the threat.
Developing a culture of transparency, trust and accountability will be a critical element of the new regulatory framework. The regulator will have the power to require annual transparency reports from companies in scope, outlining the prevalence of harmful content on their platforms and what counter measures they are taking to address these. These reports will be published online by the regulator, so that users and parents can make informed decisions about internet use. The regulator will also have powers to require additional information, including about the impact of algorithms in selecting content for users and to ensure that companies proactively report on both emerging and known harms.
The regulator will encourage and oversee the fulfilment of companies’ existing commitments to improve the ability of independent researchers to access their data, subject to appropriate safeguards.
As part of the new duty of care, we will expect companies, where appropriate, to have effective and easy-to-access user complaints functions, which will be overseen by the regulator. Companies will need to respond to users’ complaints within an appropriate timeframe and to take action consistent with the expectations set out in the regulatory framework.
We also recognise the importance of an independent review mechanism to ensure that users have confidence that their concerns are being treated fairly. We are consulting on options, including allowing designated bodies to make ‘super complaints’ to the regulator in order to defend the needs of users.
Ahead of the implementation of the new regulatory framework, we will continue to encourage companies to take early action to address online harms. To assist this process, this White Paper sets out high-level expectations of companies, including some specific expectations in relation to certain harms. We expect the regulator to reflect these in future codes of practice.
For the most serious online offending such as CSEA and terrorism, we will expect companies to go much further and demonstrate the steps taken to combat the dissemination of associated content and illegal behaviours. We will publish interim codes of practice, providing guidance about tackling terrorist activity and online CSEA later this year.
Interesting read on how to regulate platforms in the wake of the UK proposals, the copyright directive and Australia’s response to Christchurch . I have to say, while there’s some merit to his taxonomy, I think the ship has already sailed in most of the world. Content-based regulation of ISPs is in place in many jurisdictions and as far as I can see is here to stay, and probably become even more intrusive as in Austrlia.
ShivaX
April 16, 2019, 10:56pm
1364
Is Jack the prime example of failing upwards or just of how luck matters more than anything else in this world?
Nesrie
April 20, 2019, 3:18am
1366
The life of this woman is about, or probably already is… getting very hard.
the mom who hosted demanded that all the young party guests give the stuffed animals they made to her daughter
What? Wow, that’s an amazingly bad call by the mother.
I hope no one takes it out on the daughter.
It makes me uneasy when Reddit comments get run as news stories on TV.
I was listening to some NPR show today, and the reporter was trying to describe memes posted to twitter about the Muller report. On the radio. wtf is wrong with this world?
Reminds me of Brandt the physical cartoonist from The Day Today.