UK Draft Online Safety Bill Published - Latest Updates

U.K. Government Unveils Online Safety Bill

The United Kingdom government has officially released its anticipated plan for regulating online content and speech, with a particular emphasis on child safety.

This Online Safety Bill has been under development for several years. During this period, a previous proposal requiring age verification for accessing adult content online was abandoned due to widespread concerns about its practicality.

The government previously indicated a shift towards more comprehensive legislation addressing a wider spectrum of online harms. Now, it asserts that this goal has been achieved.

Bill Details and Documentation

The 145-page Online Safety Bill is publicly accessible on the gov.uk website. Supporting documents, including 123 pages of explanatory notes and a 146-page impact assessment, are also available.

Core Provisions of the Legislation

The proposed legislation places a duty of care upon digital service providers. They are now obligated to moderate user-generated content to protect users from illegal and harmful online material.

The government characterizes this plan as “groundbreaking” on a global scale. It anticipates a new era of accountability for technology companies and increased fairness within the online environment.

Concerns and Criticisms

However, critics express apprehension that the proposals could stifle freedom of expression. They suggest platforms may resort to excessive censorship as a result.

Furthermore, the bill is expected to present significant legal and operational challenges for digital businesses, potentially hindering technological innovation.

A robust debate regarding the bill’s implications is now commencing.

Legislative Process and Timeline

The bill will undergo scrutiny by a joint committee comprised of Members of Parliament (MPs). A final version will then be presented to Parliament for debate later this year.

While the timeline for enactment remains uncertain, the government’s substantial parliamentary majority suggests a likely path to becoming law. This assumes there isn't significant public opposition or internal dissent.

Statements from Government Officials

Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden stated: “Today the UK demonstrates global leadership with our groundbreaking laws to usher in a new age of accountability for tech and bring fairness and accountability to the online world.”

He further added, “We will protect children on the internet, crack down on racist abuse on social media and, through new measures to safeguard our liberties, create a truly democratic digital age.”

Challenges in Regulating the Internet

The extended period required to draft the Online Safety Bill highlights the inherent complexities of attempting to regulate the internet.

Interestingly, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport’s (DCMS) own public relations materials refer to “the government’s fight to make the internet safe”. This phrasing raises questions about the potential outcomes and beneficiaries of the U.K.’s new Online Safety laws.

Determining the future winners and losers resulting from these regulations remains an open question.

Safety and Democracy Online: A New Regulatory Framework

The Department for Digital, Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS) has announced proposed legislation intended to enhance online safety, combat hate speech, and safeguard democratic processes.

However, concerns are emerging regarding the potential for these “landmark laws” to create a complex and contradictory regulatory landscape, potentially hindering digital businesses and restricting access to online content.

Broad Scope of Application

The forthcoming laws are designed to apply extensively, extending beyond major technology companies and social media platforms to encompass a wide range of websites, applications, and services that facilitate user-generated content or online communication.

Services within scope will be legally obligated to remove or restrict the dissemination of unlawful and, for larger services, harmful content, facing substantial penalties for non-compliance with this new duty of care.

Ofcom’s Role as Internet Watchdog

Under the proposed plan, Ofcom, the U.K.’s communications regulator, will assume responsibility for overseeing online content regulation.

Ofcom will be empowered to impose fines of up to £18 million or 10% of a company’s annual global turnover – whichever is greater – on those failing to meet the new duty of care standards.

Furthermore, the regulator will possess the authority to block access to websites, raising concerns about potential censorship of entire platforms.

Potential for Criminal Sanctions

While not currently implemented, the government has reserved the option to introduce criminal offenses for senior managers, as a deferred power, should technology firms fail to adequately prioritize online safety improvements.

This measure aims to further incentivize compliance with the new regulations.

Balancing Safety and Free Expression

Despite widespread public support for stricter internet regulations, experts caution that the government’s plan could stifle online expression by compelling private companies to act as arbiters of speech.

Legal experts are also raising questions about the practicality of the framework, particularly concerning the definition of “harms” and the protection of “democratically important” content.

Defining “Harms” and “Democratically Important” Content

The ambiguity surrounding the definition of “harms” presents a significant challenge, potentially leading to legal uncertainty for digital businesses and impacting innovation and service availability in the U.K.

The inclusion of “democratically important” content adds another layer of complexity, requiring platforms to prioritize the protection of certain types of expression.

Distinction from the EU’s Digital Services Act

The U.K.’s approach differs from the European Union’s Digital Service Act, which focuses more narrowly on illegal content and standardizing reporting procedures.

The EU’s framework also addresses the risks associated with dangerous products sold on e-commerce marketplaces.

Safeguards for Expression and Journalism

In response to concerns about free expression, the government has incorporated measures to strengthen individuals’ rights to express themselves online.

Safeguards have also been added to protect journalism and democratic political debate within the U.K.

Exemptions for News Publishers

Content published on news publishers’ websites will be exempt from the new regulations, as will reader comments on those sites.

Articles from “recognized news publishers” shared on in-scope services will also be exempted, and platforms will be legally required to safeguard access to journalistic content.

The Citizen Journalist Dilemma

However, the government specifies that content from “citizen journalists” will receive the same protections as professional journalists, creating ambiguity regarding the distinction between recognized news publishers and individual bloggers or social media users.

This raises questions about how the line will be drawn and consistently applied.

Protecting Political Speech

Carve-outs to protect political speech further complicate content moderation, as extremist groups may attempt to disguise hate speech as political opinion.

Companies will be prohibited from discriminating against political viewpoints and must apply protections equally, adhering to clear terms and conditions.

Balancing Conflicting Requirements

Platforms will be responsible for balancing these conflicting requirements, guided by Codes of Practice established by Ofcom.

However, they also face the threat of significant penalties for making incorrect content moderation decisions.

AI and Human Moderation

The government appears to favor the Facebook-devised “Oversight Board” model, utilizing human judgment for complex content moderation cases.

It also discourages over-reliance on AI filters, which may lack nuance and lead to the removal of legitimate content.

User-Generated Fraud and Advertising

The bill addresses user-generated fraud, such as scams on social media, but excludes fraud conducted through online advertising, emails, or cloned websites.

This distinction is questionable, as internet users can easily create and run online advertisements, potentially circumventing the regulations.

Potential for Arbitrary Rules

The risk of arbitrary and ill-considered distinctions could result in incoherent and confusing rules prone to loopholes, ultimately undermining online safety.

Ensuring coherence between this legislation and the government’s pro-competition regime for tech giants presents a further challenge.