UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech on Monday sounded almost like Netopia’s manifesto, in its call for a functioning regulated internet. While moral indignation may not be the best driving force when it comes to regulation, Cameron is dead on the money when it comes to the nuts and bolts: no delayed court-processes or symbolic information campaigns, it’s about changing the technology. Hence, the intermediaries are key, and not only the ISP’s – listen to what the UK Prime says about search engines:
It goes that the search engines shouldn’t be involved in finding out where these images are – that they are just the ‘pipe’ that delivers the images and that holding them responsible would be a bit like holding the Post Office responsible for sending on illegal objects in anonymous packages.
But that analogy isn’t quite right.
Because the search engine doesn’t just deliver the material that people see it helps to identify it.
Companies like Google make their living out of trawling and categorising content on the web so that in a few key-strokes you can find what you’re looking for out of unimaginable amounts of information.
Then they sell advertising space to companies, based on your search patterns.
So to return to that analogy, it would be like the Post Office helping someone to identify and order the illegal material in the first place – and then sending it onto them in which case they absolutely would be held responsible for their actions.
So quite simply: we need the search engines to step up to the plate on this.
(Hmm… did I not write a blog post with that same idea just the other week?)
Predictably, the kneejerk reaction was the familiar phrases about ”protecting the open net” and ”threat to free speech“ from those who claim to have a better understanding of the technology and therefore a prerogative to decide about the online society over those who merely see the consequences of that tech. (Even the classic “it’s going to be just like China” turned up, which made me smile – considering that internet freedom juggernaut Google itself collaborates with the Chinese regime).
But free speech has never been without limit or responsibility, and the fact that governments do not regulate the internet has only left it open for private entities to write the rules (see Paul Frigyes’ column on this topic). So actually, government action is more likely to save freedom of speech online than to kill it. I much prefer legislation by elected parliamentarians who can be held responsible to their decisions and a transparent, predictable legal system, to today’s internet where decisions on censorship are made by algorithms, programmed by someone whose name we’ll never know and whose first loyalty is to his or her boss and in-turn share-holders, not civil liberties. Now, the question is whether Cameron will follow this thought through and realize that porn may not even be the most problematic thing for the online society, but profound issues about power, money, and civil rights, that require similar action. So, while the moral indignation may not be the proudest of reasons, Netopia congratulates Cameron on his courage to challenge a world-view that puts technology above man.
