Theresa May Again Demands Tech Companies Do More To Right The World's Social Media Wrongs
from the in-return,-politicians-promise-to-provide-more-bad-legislation dept
In the face of "extremist" content and other internet nasties, British PM Theresa May keeps doing something. That something is telling social media companies to do something. Move fast and break speech. Nerd harder. Do whatever isn't working well already, but with more people and processing power.
May has been shifting her anti-speech, anti-social media tirades towards the Orwellian in recent months. Her speeches and platform stances have tried to make direct government control of internet communications sound like a gift to the unwashed masses. May's desire to bend US social media companies to the UK's laws has been presented as nothing more than as a "balancing" of freedom of speech against some imagined right to go through life without being overly troubled by social media posts.
Then there's the terrorism. Terrorists use social media platforms to connect with like-minded people. May would like this to stop. She's not sure how this should be accomplished but she's completely certain smart people at tech companies could bring an end to world terrorism with a couple of well-placed filters. So sure of this is May that she wants "extremist" content classified, located, and removed within two hours of its posting.
May's crusade against logic and reality continues with her comments at the Davos Conference. Her planned speech/presentation contains more of her predictable demand that everyone who isn't a UK government agency needs to start doing things better and faster.
Although she is expected to praise the potential of technology to "transform lives", she will also call on social media companies to do much more to stop allowing content that promotes terror, extremism and child abuse.
She will say: "Technology companies still need to go further in stepping up to their responsibilities for dealing with harmful and illegal online activity.
"These companies simply cannot stand by while their platforms are used to facilitate child abuse, modern slavery or the spreading of terrorist and extremist content.
"We need to go further, so that ultimately this content is removed automatically. These companies have some of the best brains in the world. They must focus their brightest and best on meeting these fundamental social responsibilities."
"Go further…" but to what point? This is all May has said for years. Social media companies continue to struggle with moderating content, but it's not for a lack of trying. They're dealing with contradictory demands from multiple world governments, each of them declaring different types of speech to be unacceptable. The pressure isn't imaginary. Twitter has taken proactive measures in response to Germany's new hate speech law, resulting in some spectacular collateral damage. Other platforms are doing the same thing, even if the damage hasn't been as ironically glorious.
May wants harder nerding, up to and including all-knowing bots that kill objectionable content before it reaches human eyeballs. She wants the impossible. Even if it were theoretically possible to police speech better with AI, that's still years away from being the deployed at scale. Efforts that have been deployed have been routinely disastrous. Ask anyone how YouTube's Content ID is doing handling copyright infringement and you'll get a general idea of just how well algorithms police content.
For now, the problem is handled by a mixture of algorithms, human moderators, and crowd sourcing. The algorithms can't reliably target unwanted content. The humans are, well, human -- prone to error and bias. The last part -- reporting functions for users -- basically give every heckler a veto button, resulting in abuse of the system to bury content certain users don't want to see. All these efforts work well for the governments demanding them -- and these governments are the entities most likely to abuse them to silence dissent.
This is what the argument has been reduced to: calls for "more" without any interest in determining whether "more" will be helpful or even possible. The result will be the suppression of speech, rather than a victory over terrorism.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, filtering, magic wand, social media, tech companies, theresa may
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Obtuse to a blinding degree
OK, I do get it, May really just want's the problems hidden, not fixed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obtuse to a blinding degree
Terrorism, child porn, human trafficking, murder, drugs trafficking and theft are older than the internet by a substantial margin and some of those crimes might be as old as humanity itself. I haven't seen a study yet that links growth of crime to the internet.
How many of the politicians that are proposing that Mark Zuck fixes the world, have proposed a serious plan recently to increase funding for additional police detectives to actually counter these problems?
Facebook et al. function as a nice lightning rod for all criticism of people that want the world to be fixable. It's much easier to point fingers and let somebody else take the blame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Incompetent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Incompetent
More than zero I suspect/fear, and some of them might have the power to turn her disturbing ideas into something real, so unfortunately you kinda have to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Incompetent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How about getting the police to look at such things, and do real police work and find and prosecute the criminals?
It is also worth noting that someone prepared to commit suicide for a cause is likely someone who feels alienated from society. Stopping such people from communicating does not eliminate the risk, but does make it more like that they will act alone. A lone wolf is much harder to find before they act, than someone using extremist forums, or associating with extremist groups because there is nothing to look at that gives warning of their possible intent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In the Red corner are the Socialists (real deal) led by Jeremy Corbyn, a principled idealist. Tempered by the neoliberal New Labour faction, his ability to effect change would be limited to a) the number of MPs returned to Parliament and b) the number of his own MPs who are willing to implement his agenda.
The Liberal Democrats, who are ostensibly the middle ground party but buy wholesale into neoliberalism, are too few in number and too lacking in credibility to make any difference.
That sorry lot is the range of choice we have in UK politics. God help us all because even the Socialists are all over surveillance and copyright maximalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandw ales/yearendingseptember2017
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/budget-2017-london-met-pol ice-cuts-sadiq-khan-mayor-conservative-tory-amber-rudd-a8053816.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We can fix her problems right here, right now.
Now, go sit in the corner like a good bitch and STFU.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We can fix her problems right here, right now.
Then we could tell May the problem has been solved. All the 'bad actors' can no longer get to social media sites or contact anyone through it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We can fix her problems right here, right now.
I don't like her either, but the misogyny is really uncalled for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We can fix her problems right here, right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We can fix her problems right here, right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Replacement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Replacement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Replacement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Replacement
turned into a mad racist after being exposed to 4Chan.
Exactly what did they expect would happen after using that site as a source of 'learning'?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Replacement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skewed priorities
I don't want the 'brightest and best' working on the endless task of filtering social media, I want them solving world hunger and curing all diseases... and finally making me a god-damned flying car!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Skewed priorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Skewed priorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Skewed priorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Skewed priorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Skewed priorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Skewed priorities
I'd take a non-flying car - or even a motorcycle - that could fold up and be carryable that way. No more searching for parking spaces!
...there'd probably be some tradeoffs in sturdiness and (therefore) safety, though, in order to get it down to a weight that most people could carry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why only focus on social media?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like talking shit about Theresa May?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"It's not 'censorship of material critical of the government', it's 'maintaining public order'."
Not yet, but from what little I've read of her if she thought she could get away with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]