The Online Safety Bill, now Act, has taken up more of my thinking than I would probably ever admit to my friends down the pub. I think I can speak for everyone when I say the legislation itself, and the policymaking process, has inspired every single possible feeling there is. Being so interested in social science, the idea of the online world being a sort of blank slate society that can be regulated from the start is a truly fascinating notion. But it of course was - and still is - not that simple.
Everyone has their opinions on this legislation; how it has been written, who it is trying to protect and what lessons can be learned around the development and subsequent result. While all incredibly valid and interesting conversations, it is now also necessary to focus on what is said and done now that it has been passed. There is a particular need for careful communication around the process of implementation as this can ultimately shape the sector and how people are protected online.
Expectation
Now that the Bill has passed, the rhetoric of many organisations is complimentary towards the Act and celebrates that, finally, the internet will be safer, with platforms having a legal obligation to protect users from harm, children in particular. The expectation is that straight away people will not see any harmful content or that platforms will now be acting faster if such content is found; that the largest platforms, with the highest reach, use, and risk are cleaned up entirely with limited lead-in times; that where people are able to interact with each other in many different ways, this will now be restricted; where users publish their opinions positioned as facts, this will be flagged every time.
What’s more, many expect that the role and risk of algorithms and other moderation approaches will be made more transparent and clearer for all to understand. Parents who did not grow up in a world with social media and therefore do not know how to empower their children to use it safely and positively will be provided with the information needed to understand, whilst feeling comfortable that the UK Government is taking protective measures on top.
Reality
But Rome wasn’t built in a day – a fact that is apparently thought about more often than was otherwise expected, perhaps ironically. In reality, the Act itself is a skeleton, deferring much of the policy detail to the regulator, Ofcom. Its principles-based nature ensures flexibility and scope for proportionality, but it also means implementation will be an iterative and more collaborative process. The deal is not done, so to speak. And, while Ofcom has done an incredible job to prepare itself, the unprecedented workload to understand this sector, its diversity and the complexities of the online world are not something that can be sorted with the seal of the King’s signature.
Careful communication
As Ofcom starts to carry out phases of consultations on the details of platform obligations as well as further research into the sector over the next year, how organisations, platforms, the regulator, and the Government talk about the regime is crucially important. In the same way that organisations will look to influence Ofcom’s proposals, there must be consideration of unintended consequences on how this impacts wider perceptions of the sector. Online platforms provide so many benefits and users should feel empowered to have positive experiences, not scared to the point of non-use. This is also important for sector investment. Investment which is so necessary to developing the very safety tools and approaches organisations are asking for.
On top of this, while checks and balances on the regulator are of paramount importance, especially on an issue as contextual as online safety, there’s a risk of undermining the evidence-led and impartial approach the regulator is taking. This is also vital for the regulator’s ability to have the strong supervision relationships it is looking to build with in-scope platforms. The shaping of these relationships will be essential to help the continual development of implementation and generational step change that this legislation is intending. And, in some ways, this is central to the UK’s wider digital regulatory approach as how the success of this regulatory relationship pans out could set the precedent in the UK, as more powers are deferred to regulators, and possibly globally.
This has certainly never been a simple issue to navigate. The next stage will be a continued period of difficulty, added with the extra pressure of expectation. As such, there is one thing I am sure of: while the Bill has received Royal Assent, this conversation is not ending any time soon.