The Online Harms Act doesn’t go far enough to protect democracy in Canada

[Pelican Press 0]

The Online Harms Act doesn’t go far enough to protect democracy in Canada

Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

The ******** government’s recent proposal for regulating social media platforms,

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, comes as the final act in a

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

aimed at bringing some order to the digital world.

After contentious

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

and the

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, this final bill attempts to identify and regulate harmful content. The Online Harms Act follows

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, the

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

and

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

in setting up a new regulator in an attempt to address the spread of what is considered harmful content.

The idea that such efforts are necessary is not controversial—content that ********* exploits children, for instance, has already been

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, and hate speech has been ******** for decades in

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

Platform responsibility

Online harms laws are based on the idea of “

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

“: making the platforms legally responsible when users use them to distribute content that breaks laws.

Under the Online Harms Act, platforms will be required to promptly remove two forms of content—that which “********* victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor” and “intimate images posted without consent”—or face large fines.

But it also includes less strict measures to deal with other forms of harmful content, including promotion of terrorism or genocide, incitement to ********* or hate speech. Platforms will be required to develop, and make public, plans to “mitigate the risk that users will be exposed to harmful content on the services and submitting digital safety plans to the Digital Safety Commission of Canada.”

****** and punishment

There are also

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

for users who upload these forms of content. These provisions have been the subject of

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

Many civil libertarians argue that they

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, while advocates for marginalized groups believe that they are

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

But much of the debate over these specific details misses a deeper failing of the bill, which derives from the way the idea of “online harm” is understood.

CBC News looks at the Online Harms Act.

‘Lawful but awful’

For much of the last decade, digital media scholars have also been directing attention to different ways in which platform communication

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

. The definition of harmful content in Bill C-63 focuses on harms that are experienced by users when they encounter particular forms of content posted by others.

But platforms aren’t merely empty spaces for users to send messages to other users—

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

in shaping the communication that takes place, determining how messages are combined and sorted, and how their distribution is prioritized and limited.

For this reason,

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

This is often understood as the reason why fake news or hyper-partisan political commentary is so problematic on platforms. Even perfectly legal communication—what is called “

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

” content—can contribute to a pattern of serious harm.

One person denying the scientific consensus on vaccines, promoting entirely baseless *********** theories about political figures or

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, might not be “harmful” in the sense that Bill C-63 defines the concept.

But when social media algorithms ensure that many users don’t see counter-evidence from outside their “

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

,” the dangers are real. This is also true of any number of other kinds of

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, such as

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

of political candidates.

Democracy at risk

Democracy relies on open and rational deliberation. The conditions for that kind of communication can be degraded by the way that algorithms operate. That algorithms are operated by private, for-profit corporations that seek to maximize “engagement” makes the problem even worse; this creates an

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

and further

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

Exactly how algorithms should be regulated is not a simple question. Some of the provisions in Bill C-63 might be a step in the right direction: requirements for risk mitigation plans, an ombudsperson who can help the public submit complaints about platforms to a regulator and obligations to provide information about content. And importantly, all of this can be done without unnecessarily violating users’ freedom of expression.

But a more specific legal obligation on platforms to deprioritize content that is clearly false—such as public health messaging or information related to elections—would be necessary to stop increasing online polarization and promoting

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

While the Online Harms Act might protect individuals from being exposed to specific kinds of content, protecting the democratic nature of our society will require a more robust set of regulations than what has been proposed.

Provided by
The Conversation

This article is republished from

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

under a Creative Commons license. Read the

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

.

Citation:
Opinion: The Online Harms Act doesn’t go far enough to protect democracy in Canada (2024, March 20)
retrieved 21 March 2024
from

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Science, Physics News, Science news, Technology News, Physics, Materials, Nanotech, Technology, Science
#Online #Harms #Act #doesnt #protect #democracy #Canada

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up