Online Safety Bill changed to lift 'legal but harmful' content measures

Published date29 November 2022
Publication titleWalesOnline (Wales)
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 had drawn criticism from free speech campaigners, who claimed that governments or tech platforms might use the Bill to censor certain content. However, the move was branded "a hugely backward step" by the Samaritans charity

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.

Under the bill, social media companies could also face being fined by Ofcom up to 10% of annual turnover if they fail to fulfil policies to tackle racist or homophobic content on their platforms. 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".

She said: "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. 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...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT