Social media companies “shamefully far” from tackling illegal and dangerous content
From the webpage:
The Home Affairs Committee has strongly criticised social media companies for failing to take down and take sufficiently seriously illegal content – saying they are “shamefully far” from taking sufficient action to tackle hate and dangerous content on their sites.
- Read the report summary
- Read the report conclusions and recommendations
- Read the full report: Hate crime: abuse, hate and extremism online
The Committee recommends the Government should assess whether failure to remove illegal material is in itself a crime and, if not, how the law should be strengthened. They recommend that the Government also consult on a system of escalating sanctions to include meaningful fines for social media companies which fail to remove illegal content within a strict timeframe.
… (emphasis in original)
I can only guess the recent EU censorship spasm, EU’s Unfunded Hear/See No Evil Policy, has made the UK parliament bold. Or at least bolder than usual.
what leaves me puzzled though, is that “hate crimes,” are by definition crimes. Yes? And even the UK laws against hate crimes, police officials to enforce those laws and courts in which to try those suspected of hate crimes and prisons in the event they are convicted. Yes?
If all that’s true, then for social media, really media in general, you need only one rule:
If what you see, hear and/or read disturbs you, look, listen and/or read something else.
It’s really that simple. No costs to social media companies, no extra personnel to second guess what some number of UK parliament members find to be “hate and dangerous content,” no steady decay of the right to speak without government pre-approval, etc.
As far as what other people prefer to see, hear and/or read, well, that’s really none of your business.