header-logo header-logo

Posting hate online

21 July 2017 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7755 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Social media companies are facing mounting criticism for failing to police harmful or illegal content on their sites, as Chris Bryden & Michael Salter explain

  • There is a growing opinion that social media companies should not be allowed simply to host content that can be extreme without consequence.

As the world becomes ever more interconnected and dependent upon the internet and in particular social media, governments are finally waking up to the risks that such platforms can pose. Recently a number of nations, including the UK, have noted the risk that social media can pose. On 1 May 2017 the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee criticised social media companies for the harm that their platforms can cause by failing to act on illegal or harmful content.

The gist of the criticism is that social media providers have a duty as content providers to police the posts that they carry – a position first postulated by the authors in their paper ‘I can see you: harassment and stalking on the Internet’ ( Information & Communications

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll