THE approach to online harms legislation to date – both in Jersey and further afield – largely tells the story of communities seeking a digital “delete” button.
While the government’s proposed new powers do not quite manage to create one, they would see internet services required to establish simple, accessible complaint procedures, and, for the first time, the creation of a statutory right to demand the removal of harmful material or content that breaches a platform’s own rules.
Under the proposals, platforms would have to commit to responding to requests for the removal of harmful content within 48 hours.
Published yesterday, responses to the public consultation on the proposals suggest strong backing for the concept, though several respondents argued that the takedown window is too large, given the speed at which content travels – and the fact that serious harm can be inflicted in mere seconds. Indeed, today’s paper carries a warning for local pupils participating in a TikTok trend which has already left a child in the United States in a coma.
In cases such as these, the timeline is unforgiving. By the time a report is filed, the damage is often already done.
Yet, as the case for speed becomes clearer, the timeline for action suggests that the machinery of government is moving to a different clock.
Online harms legislation is currently not expected to be lodged for debate by the States Assembly until 2027, with implementation likely to be still even further off.
The fear, therefore, is that what will result from the important but lengthy process of public engagement, scrutiny, consultation and law-drafting and, ultimately, debate will be regulation for an online world that will have already moved on.
Two years ago, many of today’s concerns, from the scale of generative AI use (and abuse) to the way that same harmful content is then amplified, were only just beginning to surface. In two years’ time, the landscape will have shifted all over again.
That does not mean efforts to legislate are futile, but does suggest the need for an approach to policymaking in this area that is more iterative, more responsive, and in prime position to adapt as tech evolves… as we know it will.
A fixed answer to a problem that is always moving and mutating will only ever go so far.
