Online Safety Bill changed on free speech fears

The government said it was making the changes to the proposed internet safety laws over fears the original duties would have incentivised firms to over-remove legal but potentially harmful material over the fear of sanction – to the detriment of free speech.

Under the original bill’s plans, the biggest platforms would have been compelled to not only remove illegal content, but also any material which had been named in the legislation as legal but potentially harmful.

These measures drew criticism from free speech campaigners, who claimed that governments or tech platforms could use the bill to censor certain content.

Now the key requirements of the bill are being redefined.

Platforms will be required to remove illegal content, as well as take down any material that is in breach of its own terms of service.

And instead of the legal but harmful duties, there will now be a greater requirement for firms to provide adults with tools to hide certain content they do not wish to see – including types of content that do not meet the criminal threshold but could be harmful to see, such as the glorification of eating disorders, misogyny and some other forms of abuse.

It is an approach which the government is calling a “triple shield” of online protection which also allows for freedom of speech.

Updates to strengthen accountability and transparency will also be introduced to boost child online safety, it was confirmed, which will require tech firms to publish summaries of risk assessments in regard to potential harm to children on their sites, show how they enforce user age limits and publish details of enforcement action taken against them by Ofcom – the new regulator for the tech sector.

The updated rules will also prohibit a platform from removing a user or account unless they have clearly broken the site’s terms of service or the law.

Julie Bentley, chief executive of Samaritans, described dropping the requirement to remove “legal but harmful” content as “a hugely backward step”.

“Of course children should have the strongest protection but the damaging impact that this type of content has doesn’t end on your 18th birthday,” she said.

“Increasing the controls that people have is no replacement for holding sites to account through the law and this feels very much like the government snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell said it was a “major weakening” of the bill, adding: “Replacing the prevention of harm with an emphasis on free speech undermines the very purpose of this bill, and will embolden abusers, Covid deniers, hoaxers, who will feel encouraged to thrive online.”

The Online Safety Bill is due to return to Parliament next week after being repeatedly delayed.

The government also confirmed further amendments will be tabled shortly aimed at boosting protections for women and girls online.