New Internet Laws.This was shown on a UK popular Morning TV program on March 16th.
It refers to a UK Member of Parliment , Nadine Dorries who has been aiming to change certain laws to do with various and Large type Internet Organisations who have allowed various concerning things to occurr on their platforms, that she wanted to either stop or alter. this includes Search engines and social media platforms.
I think some of what she has done does seem to be valid and for the better as long as they are applied.
This includes even Companies like Facebook having to oblige by these new laws. that can stop online harrashment and allowing corrupt / false advertising, those type of things for eg...etc.
I am not sure if this may just apply to the UK or World Wide.
BUT at the same time... IT also can create new laws that I think many of us would or could oppose and allow Govts even more power over us on acting as a nanny state to the public. such as :
Ministers revealed social media platforms will no longer be able to decide what content is deemed 'legal but harmful' in a bid to protect freedom of speech
This may be worth further discussions if enough further interest is shown.
QuoteNadine Dorries: How I will preserve freedom of the Press online under toughened up internet laws
Search engines and social media will have to notify publishers to remove posts
Content cannot be taken down until an appeal has been heard, under new plans
Ofcom will have the power to impose fines of up to 10 per cent for any breaches.
News content will be protected against censorship by tech giants under toughened up internet laws, Nadine Dorries vowed yesterday.
Search engines and social media platforms will have to notify publishers if they seek to remove any posts and submit it to an appeals process, the Culture Secretary said.
She added that under the measures – expected to be added to the Online Safety Bill as an amendment – tech companies would not be allowed to take down content until an appeal had been heard.
(https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article26480937.ece/ALTERNATES/s458b/0_This-Morning.jpg)
QuoteAnguish of tragic Molly's family over wait for Instagram evidence
The father of tragic teen Molly Russell called Facebook's parent firm Meta 'utterly shameful' for making his family wait for answers over her suicide.
The 14-year-old took her own life in 2017 after viewing content about depression and self-harm on Instagram, which is owned by Meta, and Pinterest.
Molly Russell took her life in 2017.
Her inquest was due to begin next month but has been delayed until September after the family's lawyers said they still had not seen the evidence provided by Meta.
Yesterday, the tech giant said it had provided an 'unprecedented' 12,500 posts the schoolgirl saw on her account before her death as evidence.
But North London Coroner's Court heard this had only just been passed to the coroner – despite there being 12 working days until it was due to begin. Oliver Saunders QC, representing Molly's family, said they were 'frustratingly and regrettably' unable to proceed due to the volume of material. Molly's father, Ian Russell, told how the delay of her inquest was a 'significant blow to our family'.
Pinterest had given full details of Molly's activity on the site early on, he said, but Meta was only doing so now – despite being asked years ago. He said: 'To make a bereaved family wait even longer to get answers regarding the circumstances of their child's death is utterly shameful.'
Caoilfhionn Gallagher QC, for Meta, said the firm had 'sought to engage throughout the process'.
Ministers revealed social media platforms will no longer be able to decide what content is deemed 'legal but harmful' in a bid to protect freedom of speech
Under the draft Bill, what fell within this category would be decided by the tech companies.
But ministers yesterday announced the Government would now draw up a list of specific categories that met the criteria, which will be subject to approval by both Houses of Parliament.
The Bill will also give Ofcom powers to demand data from tech companies, such as how their algorithms work. Officials will be able to enter company premises, interview employees and require firms to undergo external assessments.
Why we must act now to protect our children, writes Tech and Digital Economy Minister CHRIS PHILP
Social media sites currently operate under no one's rules but their own.
This has led to an online world where teenagers' lives can be ruined by cyberbullying, suicide is encouraged, vulnerable people are radicalised by terrorists, kids are exposed to pornography and racist bile is shared without consequence.
What's worse – a lot of this vile stuff is actively promoted to huge audiences via algorithms simply because it makes social media firms more money.
QuoteNew rules for tech giants
Adult websites must have robust checks to stop under-18s accessing them.
Paid-for scam adverts – including those using bogus celebrity endorsements – brought within the Bill to combat online fraud.
Firms must proactively take down the worst illegal content such as terrorism.
Clamp down on vile internet trolls by giving users more control over who can contact them.
Cyberflashing – sending an unsolicited sexual image online – to be made a criminal offence.
Tech bosses could face up to two years in jail if their firm breaches the law.
The case for regulation couldn't be clearer: We have a moral duty to make big tech take action and clean up the internet once and for all. As a father, nothing could be more important to me.
Today our Online Safety Bill has its first reading in the Commons. This is Britain leading the world to force tech firms to tackle illegal and harmful content.
But we also need to make sure that these powerful companies do not try to muzzle people just because they have controversial opinions.
At the moment, woke moderators in Silicon Valley can arbitrarily censor feeds and dictate the terms of political debate and journalism.
Under this Bill, platforms will have to respect free speech and protect content of journalistic and democratic importance.
They will not be able to take down legal content where there is no breach of their own rules – something YouTube did last year to TalkRadio.
The Government will set out what constitutes the legal but still harmful material firms must address, and Parliament will approve it. And if people feel their posts have been taken down without good reason they will be able to appeal.
Trusted news sites such as MailOnline will be exempt from the Bill's provisions, including its reader comment sections which inspire such lively debate.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10621259/Nadine-Dorries-preserve-freedom-Press-online.html