Comments closed on Digital Britain Report
Comments have now closed on the Digital Britain interim report . We’ve had our say on the section on content that suggests a labelling scheme, and have been reasonably vocal in blogs and articles elsewhere about what we think the main issues are.
But we always think that if you flag up an issue, you should have at least an idea about how to deal with it. With that in mind, it’s worth recapping what eModeration think the choices are for Lord Carter’s proposed labelling or content standards scheme.
A content standards scheme could work effectively in two ways. The first is by putting the onus on the host to apply standards at the point at which content is uploaded (or by filtering out content that doesn’t meet those standards). This puts legal responsibility onto the host and can be achieved by either: pre-moderation (moderating content before it reaches the site); post-moderation (moderating it once it has gone up onto the site) or reactive moderation (reacting to content that’s been flagged by a user). This latter option relies however on site users applying the contents standards, and while a ‘flag abuse’ button should always be incorporated into a site, does not of course provide any kind of guarantee that all content has met these standards.
The second is by putting the onus onto the person uploading the content to abide by standards set out by the host. This would need agreement on what acceptable standards are, and relies in the most part on other users reporting content that violates those standards - i.e. reactive moderation.
Whichever route the Report recommends, if this is to work, we need universal agreement on standards for content that originates from any country in the world. We have said in our feedback on the report that we would like to know whether international collaboration is being sought on this issue. We know from experience that there is little recourse to report inappropriate, harmful or illegal content generated in countries where there is not a clear reporting authority such as the IWF, CyberTipline or CEOP . Agreeing and applying international standards for content could be the first step in a bigger collaboration to fight illegal content, and promote safe use of the Internet.
But we always think that if you flag up an issue, you should have at least an idea about how to deal with it. With that in mind, it’s worth recapping what eModeration think the choices are for Lord Carter’s proposed labelling or content standards scheme.
A content standards scheme could work effectively in two ways. The first is by putting the onus on the host to apply standards at the point at which content is uploaded (or by filtering out content that doesn’t meet those standards). This puts legal responsibility onto the host and can be achieved by either: pre-moderation (moderating content before it reaches the site); post-moderation (moderating it once it has gone up onto the site) or reactive moderation (reacting to content that’s been flagged by a user). This latter option relies however on site users applying the contents standards, and while a ‘flag abuse’ button should always be incorporated into a site, does not of course provide any kind of guarantee that all content has met these standards.
The second is by putting the onus onto the person uploading the content to abide by standards set out by the host. This would need agreement on what acceptable standards are, and relies in the most part on other users reporting content that violates those standards - i.e. reactive moderation.
Whichever route the Report recommends, if this is to work, we need universal agreement on standards for content that originates from any country in the world. We have said in our feedback on the report that we would like to know whether international collaboration is being sought on this issue. We know from experience that there is little recourse to report inappropriate, harmful or illegal content generated in countries where there is not a clear reporting authority such as the IWF, CyberTipline or CEOP . Agreeing and applying international standards for content could be the first step in a bigger collaboration to fight illegal content, and promote safe use of the Internet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment