As you probably know, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has released a proposal entitled Safer Online Services and Media Platforms.
Under the proposal, platforms (which will include sites like The BFD) will be required to come up with codes of practice, approved by a regulator. As a platform you can refuse to take part but you’ll still have to comply with the code of practice even if you weren’t involved in writing it. So tough, there isn’t any opting out.
The regulator will be independent (yeah, right!) and will work with platforms to, in the words of the proposal, “create a safer environment”. Excuse me while I roll my eyes.
Oh, and the regulator will have the power to force platforms to have algorithms in place to “prevent amplifying very harmful content”. Also, the regulator will be able to require platforms to submit “transparency reports” and audits regarding how much they’re complying.
So, how is “harmful” or “unsafe” content defined in the proposal?
Harmful content is defined as content “where the experience of content causes loss or damage to rights, property, or physical, social, emotional, and mental wellbeing”. Unsafe content is “where there is a risk of harm occurring if that content was experienced by a person”.
Which basically means, amongst other things, “hurty feelings”. Actually, the content in question doesn’t even have to have caused someone hurty feelings so long as it could cause hurty feelings.
The fact that what you said was true, and or there was no intent to cause hurty feelings, won’t be a defence. If you publish an online article saying that a man can’t become a woman and a tranny gets his feelings hurt you’re now in line to get a smack from the regulator. The fact that a man actually can’t became a woman is irrelevant.
What about penalties? If you’re an author or creator and you breach the code of practice, you can potentially be kicked off the platform even if the platform has no problems with what you wrote. That’s because every platform will need to comply with the code of practice even if they disagree with it.
As far as platforms are concerned, if you keep being naughty you’ll be subject to a huge fine and, if that doesn’t work, you’re likely to be shut down.
Now we get down to “Te Tiriti”. Codes of practice will be required to meet “the government’s obligations under Te Tiriti”. Also Maori and iwi will have a role in the “governance of the regulator”, aka TOW as a partnership.
But wait, there’s more! The proposal expects that the regulator will have significant Maori presence on the regulator board and potentially require Maori to be involved in the creation of codes of practice. Co-governance, don’t you know?
If you publish an article saying that TOW isn’t a partnership or that co-governance is a sham, you will face the wrath of some bro on the regulator board.
In summary: the proposal will require platforms to make sure content is “safe”, with “safe” excluding anything that could cause hurty feelings. Everything enforced by a regulator who can issue fines or worse. Codes of practice to be created by platforms. Codes of practice must be approved by the regulator. As a platform you can choose not to take part but you’ll still be bound by the code of practice. Regulator to be overseen by Maori overlords who will have at least one representative on the board.
Make no mistake. The outcome of this proposal, if enacted, and together with the Disinformation Project, will be to shutdown any voice on the right.
You can make a submission and view the discussion document here.