Websites to be fined millions by UK online watchdog over 'online harms' under new proposals

[Alpha1]

The UK is preparing legislation to create a new online watchdog to regulate online communities. Fines could be similar to the GDPR fines. i.e. millions. The scope of regulation would include a code of conduct for online media with penalties for:

• harmful content
• fake news
• disinformation
• hate crimes
• harassment
• sale of illegal goods
• revenge porn
• terrorist propaganda
• child abuse

Outlining the proposals, Culture Secretary Jeremy Wright said: "The era of self-regulation for online companies is over.

More information here:

Websites to be fined over 'online harms' under new proposals

Apps and websites that do not protect their users may be fined or blocked under new proposals.

www.bbc.com

Related suggestion:

Better functionality to report and moderate illegal hate speech

As the first EU nation has now approved a bill to impose hefty multimillion fines on communities for not removing abusive content within 24 hours, we are in dire need of better functionality for content flagging, reporting and moderation. More information below. We need to have functionality to...

xenforo.com

 

[Alpha1]

btw: its ironic that after the UK tries to leave the EU, they propose even stricter regulation than the EU's insane plans.

 

[StarArmy]

Honestly, sites should be policing themselves for this stuff already. While there's huge potential to do the internet good, I imagine this will take a lot of manpower to actually do what it says it should, and these types of laws often get expanded over their original intents and get people in trouble who really don't deserve it so I'm a little skeptical. For example, there are people who believe that criticism of Isreal's treatment of Palestinians is anti-Semitic hate speech. On the other hand there are people who believe that criticism of Palestinians for pro-terror culture is is hate speech. Or, for example, that criticism of religions is hate speech, while others believe that religions are inherently disinformation.

 

[AzzidReign]

• fake news
• disinformation

These 2 worry me. Who's to say what is fake news? I mean, there is obvious fake news, and then there is an effort to claim something as fake news when it isn't. Same with disinformation. What one group may think is disinformation, another can have studies and facts backing up that information...but those studies and facts are ignored by the group claiming disinformation.

Thanks but no thanks. Propaganda has gotten way too out of hand. I wonder what this will do to conspiracy sites...I guess if you put a claim saying they are theories that it won't get hit? I mean, same would go for sites like TheOnion...claiming they are satire. Guess we all need disclaimers for threads that may appear on our sites with this stuff?

harmful content

Harmful to who? Are user created game modifications considered harmful? Maybe to the developer(s)? But then you can look at what user created mods has done for Counter Strike and people are still playing that bc of the mods. Slippery slope.

 

[Claverhouse]

After the Guardian's take, my main worry is the [ new ] use of the cringing word 'Harms'.

I assumed it was just because the Guardian are cissies, but it's very like the word 'Sharps' for knives etc., not to mention that harm is it's own plural already.

Internet crackdown raises fears for free speech in Britain

Critics say online harms white paper could lead to North Korean-style censorship

www.theguardian.com

 

[imno007]

Here we go again, just going from bad to worse. At least six of those encompass so many possible behaviors and differences of opinon by so many different people. And when you have a generation of emotionally stunted kids and young adults who hang out with their friends mostly online and consequently have next to no real life experience, the list of things that can be considered harmful or harassment, etc., is ever growing. You correct their spelling online and someone might accuse you of being a bully.

So... what it will come down to is some "watchdog," comprised, of course, of people with their own religious and cultural biases, deciding what is and isn't acceptable behavior, and your only choice is to either obey or fight them in court. And the end result of all these kinds of laws is more sites going private and far fewer online businesses succeeding, because only companies with big pockets will be able to afford the cost of doing business online.

 

[ManagerJosh]

This is a huge concern and an even larger problem with huge chilling effects no matter which corner of the globe one inhibits. There are far too many shades of gray in how one interprets information.

Factor in human interpretation, politics and cross-border issues, one country's facts is another country's propaganda.

 

[Claverhouse]

Plus of course, a separate measure will be coming into force in Britain soon: from beyond the grave the Demon Butler's obsession with thinking about the children and protecting us all from the devastating effects of porn that has laid waste to a generation will be requiring anyone who wants to look at porn to be entered into databases as a Registered Pornlover.

WAR ON PORN: UK flicks switch on 'I am a pervert' web filters

No sex please. We're British

www.theregister.co.uk

The UK's AgeID porn filters are a recurring April Fool's joke with a dark punchline

Will the United Kingdom (UK) start forcing its internet users to prove their age with documents and use a unique identifier if they wish to freely browse

www.privateinternetaccess.com