Recommendations & Conclusions
6 items
3
Conclusion
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
Our predecessor Petitions Committee’s report concluded that self-regulation of social media had failed. Despite the user safety tools and innovations platforms have introduced since then, these companies have continued to place insufficient priority on user safety to protect users from abusive and hateful behaviour on their platforms, or ensure users …
Government response. The government acknowledges the Committee's work and agrees on the devastating impact of online abuse, reaffirming its intention for the Online Safety Bill to end social media self-regulation and introduce accountability for the tech sector.
16
Conclusion
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
The Law Commission is right to recommend refocusing online communications offences onto the harm abusive messages can cause to victims. We welcome the Government’s commitment to adopt the proposed threatening and ‘harm-based’ communications offences. However, we also acknowledge the uncertainty and hesitation of some witnesses about how the new harm-based …
Government response. The government welcomes the committee's comments, confirms the Online Safety Bill will incorporate the Law Commission's recommended communications offences, and notes concerns about interpretation, stating the CPS is anticipated to update guidelines and implementation will be monitored.
17
Recommendation
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
The Government should monitor how effectively any new communications offences that are enacted—in particular, the Law Commission’s proposed harm-based offence—protect people from, and provide redress for victims of, online abuse, while also respecting freedom of expression online. We recommend that the Government publishes an initial review of the workings and …
Government response. The government welcomes the recommendations, confirming the Bill will incorporate the Law Commission’s proposed communications offences and stating it will monitor their implementation and impact once in force. They do not explicitly commit to publishing an initial review within two …
24
Conclusion
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
Social media platforms told us they already have rules against previously banned users returning, as well as the tools and data needed to identify users and prevent them starting new accounts. However, the evidence we heard suggests this is not a priority for them, and that some users are taking …
Government response. The government acknowledges the committee's observation and will keep it under consideration, outlining how the Online Safety Bill will require services to assess and mitigate risks from anonymous abuse, with Ofcom setting steps for enforcement against repeat offenders.
25
Recommendation
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
Social media platforms must have robust methods in place to trace users posting content that violates the platform’s terms of service, and must effectively enforce their own sanctions against such users. We recommend that, as part of the new online safety regulatory framework, social media platforms should be required to …
Government response. The government acknowledges the recommendation and states it will continue to keep it under consideration. They note the Online Safety Bill requires companies to assess risks, including those from anonymity, and that Ofcom’s codes of practice could include steps for …
26
Recommendation
Second Report - Tackling online abuse
Acknowledged
Where there is a need to trace and investigate accounts posting potentially illegal content, this is usually technically possible even if the account is publicly anonymous. However, the police’s ability to trace accounts posting such content at scale is constrained by a lack of resources. This underlines the need for …
Government response. The government states it has engaged with law enforcement to review police powers for tackling illegal anonymous abuse, and the outcome will inform its position, but does not commit to publishing the conclusions or a timetable for changes. They add …