Recommendations & Conclusions
7 items
1
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
In the course of this inquiry, we identified five key principles that we believe are crucial for regulation of social media and related technologies: 1) Public safety: Algorithmically accelerated misinformation is a danger that companies and government need to address—the government and platform companies should work together to protect the …
Read more
In the course of this inquiry, we identified five key principles that we believe are crucial for regulation of social media and related technologies: 1) Public safety: Algorithmically accelerated misinformation is a danger that companies and government need to address—the government and platform companies should work together to protect the public from it. 2) Free and safe expression: Neither government nor private companies should be arbiters of truth. Steps to tackle amplified misinformation should be in line with the fundamental right of free expression, with restrictions where proportionate and necessary to protect national security, public safety, health, or to prevent disorder and crime. 3) Responsibility: Users should be held liable for what they post online, but the platforms they post on are also responsible, especially with regard to the systems used to moderate, circulate or amplify content. 4) Control: Users should have control over both their personal data and what they see online. This includes the right to delete the data stored by platforms and services which is used to drive content and advertisement recommendation algorithms. 5) Transparency: The technology used by platform companies, including social media algorithms, has huge public safety implications, and should be transparent and accessible to public authorities. (Conclusion, Paragraph 6) Misleading and harmful content on social media
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the committee's principles and the challenges of misinformation, outlining various legislative and non-legislative measures, including the Online Safety Act 2023 and ongoing media literacy efforts, to address these issues while balancing free expression.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
6
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
Internet users are exposed to large volumes of harmful and misleading content which can deceive, damage mental health, normalise extremist views, undermine democracy, and fuel violence. We are concerned by the evidence that recommendation algorithms—integral to the advertisement- and engagement-driven business models of social media companies—play a role in this. …
Read more
Internet users are exposed to large volumes of harmful and misleading content which can deceive, damage mental health, normalise extremist views, undermine democracy, and fuel violence. We are concerned by the evidence that recommendation algorithms—integral to the advertisement- and engagement-driven business models of social media companies—play a role in this. Young people are particularly vulnerable to these harms, and 53 those born today will never have known a world without AI—we plan to explore in detail the impact the online world has on their developing brains in our future work. (Conclusion, Paragraph 26)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledged the committee's concerns about harmful online content and algorithms, outlining existing legislative and non-legislative measures such as the Online Safety Act 2023 and efforts to enhance media literacy.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
13
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
The UK government—like its counterparts around the world—is facing the challenge of attempting to regulate hugely powerful technology companies that operate across the world, providing technologies that transform societies, with bigger budgets than many countries. It is essential that their impact on our society be understood, effectively scrutinised and, where …
Read more
The UK government—like its counterparts around the world—is facing the challenge of attempting to regulate hugely powerful technology companies that operate across the world, providing technologies that transform societies, with bigger budgets than many countries. It is essential that their impact on our society be understood, effectively scrutinised and, where necessary, regulated in the public interest by Parliament. The committee has experienced some of the challenges of this in its engagement with these companies. We were reassured by the statements from Google, Meta, TikTok and X in our evidence session that they accepted their responsibility to be accountable to Parliament, and we hope that this will be put into practice. (Conclusion, Paragraph 39)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the committee's report, its examination of challenges, and the importance of public safety, accountability, and transparency, while also recognizing the challenges posed by misinformation.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
14
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
We are concerned by disjointed approaches from platforms to false and harmful content; in particular by recent moves from X and Meta to water down their Terms of Service and approach to content moderation. While there are merits to crowd-sourcing models of context provision and fact-checking—as part of a wider …
Read more
We are concerned by disjointed approaches from platforms to false and harmful content; in particular by recent moves from X and Meta to water down their Terms of Service and approach to content moderation. While there are merits to crowd-sourcing models of context provision and fact-checking—as part of a wider policy on misleading and harmful content—these platforms seem to be prioritising this method over third- party fact checking without clear evidence on whether it will adequately protect users from algorithmically amplified harm and misinformation. (Conclusion, Paragraph 40)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government shares the committee's concerns regarding amplified misleading content and agrees more evidence is needed, stating it is looking to build its evidence base and monitoring changes, while also mentioning a future framework for researchers to access online safety data.
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
15
Recommendation
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
In line with our Principle 1 of tackling amplified misinformation, the government should compel platforms to put in place minimum standards for addressing the spread of misleading content online. More information is needed on the merits of different approaches to this. The government should commission research into the relative benefits …
Read more
In line with our Principle 1 of tackling amplified misinformation, the government should compel platforms to put in place minimum standards for addressing the spread of misleading content online. More information is needed on the merits of different approaches to this. The government should commission research into the relative benefits of independent third-party fact-checkers, crowd-sourced context provision, and AI driven detection of misinformation, using researchers who are independent, bring 55 diverse perspectives on the issue, and have full access to the data of these systems. The research should enable Ofcom to offer guidance on the most effective method, or combination of methods, to address misinformation. (Recommendation, Paragraph 41)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government shares concerns about misleading content and agrees more evidence is needed to assess different approaches, stating it is looking to build its evidence base. It mentions past initiatives and a future framework under the Data (Use and Access) Act to enable independent researchers …
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
22
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
Foreign interference and disinformation campaigns, with use of technology such as bots and AI, put UK citizens at risk. The possibility that some of the divisive messages and deceptive content spread by users—and amplified by algorithms—last summer were part of such an influence operation is deeply concerning. In order to …
Read more
Foreign interference and disinformation campaigns, with use of technology such as bots and AI, put UK citizens at risk. The possibility that some of the divisive messages and deceptive content spread by users—and amplified by algorithms—last summer were part of such an influence operation is deeply concerning. In order to tackle amplified disinformation, identified by Principle 1, the government and Ofcom should collaborate with platforms to identify and track disinformation actors and the techniques and behaviours they use to spread adversarial and deceptive narratives online. (Recommendation, Paragraph 58)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the risk of foreign interference and states it is working to better understand indicators for platforms to detect it, while also continuing to engage with experts. They note existing Codes of Practice contain measures applicable to illegal foreign interference, but do not …
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
32
Conclusion
2nd Report – Social media, misinformati…
Acknowledged
In particular, we were concerned by evidence that Google may have helped to monetise misinformation relating to the attacks, contributing to the violence. This is unacceptable, and is just one example of a much wider problem with the digital advertising industry. We are concerned that Google was seemingly unaware of …
Read more
In particular, we were concerned by evidence that Google may have helped to monetise misinformation relating to the attacks, contributing to the violence. This is unacceptable, and is just one example of a much wider problem with the digital advertising industry. We are concerned that Google was seemingly unaware of the chain of events when we asked them about it; failed to tell us how much revenue was earned from this; and failed to reassure us that the company would prevent this from happening again. (Conclusion, Paragraph 96)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the concern about online misinformation and its potential for real-world impact, stating its commitment to a safer online world and urging providers to counter its spread. It highlights that the Online Safety Act takes a proportionate approach by focusing on illegal content …
Read full response →
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology