Internet moderation – Who is responsible?
“2nd Anoniversary” by Anonymous9000 is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
The evolution of the Internet has been a double-edged sword, bringing both convenience and uncontrollable chaos. In its early days, the Internet was not intended as a platform for mass media entertainment or commercial transactions but as a digital communication tool, taking advantage of its speed, reach and decentralized nature. The emerging mass media led to the emergence of homogeneous self-governing communities and the spread of more academic knowledge through the Internet. Cyberbullying describes using electronic devices to bully and harass users on the Internet (Smith, Steffgen, & Sittichai, 2013, P. 3). The moderation of online platforms is vital due to the rapid spread of information on the Internet, which makes regulation of online information challenging. Therefore, which party should be responsible for the moderation of the Internet: the government, the social media platforms, or the Internet users?
Online users – individual responsibility
The Internet user is the smallest unit of practice in Internet information moderation. Users form an interactive platform in the dynamic two-way process of posting and receiving information, acting as both consumers and producers of information. Although the role of individual users is minimal, the sheer number of users makes it difficult to control the Internet at the micro level, and the COVID-19 attack has increased citizens’ dependence on the Internet, with quarantine leading to an inseparability to work, study and live. Meanwhile, the quarantine has led to an unprecedented rise in depression among Internet users, who resort to the Internet to vent their frustrations. Hatred, sexism and racist comments frequently appear, from “Chinese people eat bats” to US President Donald Trump’s racist comments about the “Chinese Virus” and “Kung flu.” (Los Angeles Times, 2020). President Trump’s misleading rhetoric against the Chinese people has primarily contributed to the unfair treatment of Chinese people worldwide regarding COVID-19.
Not only racist remarks but also pornographic advertisements are part of the lack of moderation in Internet use. When browsing portals, there are always pornographic advertisements that cannot be turned off at the top or bottom of the side of the website. These ads display a false ‘close ad’ button, and once the user clicks on it, they are redirected to a pornographic website. Part of these pornographic sites is packaged as phishing sites designed to defraud users of their personal property while posing the security risk of stealing users’ privacy. Since the Internet is not classified, it is easy for minors to navigate to pornographic advertisements and further browse pornographic websites. This poses a great danger to the mental health of minors. Moderation on an individual level should therefore be linked to individual self-awareness. Every internet user should set an example by posting positive content. To achieve the following things:
- report toxic content to media platforms.
- refrain from posting disturbing, harassing, or discriminatory content.
- minors should be accompanied by a guardian when using the Internet
Social media platform regulation
“Instagram and other Social Media Apps” by Jason A. Howie is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
The principles of Media are a watchdog in publishing information and a fourth estate moral standard, and the principles of Media still apply to the free publication of information in the media. At the same time, the exercise of power and the practice of democracy are monitored. It is also vital that media platforms take on the responsibility of moderation while attracting users to them. The vetting of platforms is the first threshold for disseminating information, and disturbing information should not be delivered to users’ pages. Firstly the platform provides the technology that allows information to be disseminated. It is not a producer of information but acts as a medium to allow information to circulate. Secondly, commerciality does not sum up all platforms, which need to balance their commercial and political interests with the needs of their users to survive. Therefore, according to both characteristics, platforms do not fully guarantee the right to freedom of expression of their users. This means that the platform screens and blocks users’ speech, leading to the limitations of the platform moderate.
The evolution of internet technology has allowed artificial intelligence to learn human language even better. However, it is not enough for AI to fully grasp and analyze information content accurately. Therefore, media platforms generally use a combination of AI and humans to review posted information. On some social media platforms such as Tumbler and Pinterest, users can get relevant photo search results by describing precisely what they want to search for. The platform generates the corresponding search results when the user wants to search for the female body. These results are generally seductive, even with sexually suggestive images. To a large extent, this suggests that the platforms do not regulate search content correctly and that the platforms own a bias or discriminatory preference. Therefore, the platform, acting as a tool for exchanging information, should be fair and impartial in the search results it publishes, free of any bias in the search content, and provide a proper review of questionable content.
Government control
The government, as the organization with the most extraordinary power over the direction of an entire country, should use its authority to help citizens when in danger. When the Internet has the potential to cause harm to users, the government should also regulate this. However, some Internet users believe such actions violate “freedom of expression” (Brannon, V. C., & Novak, W. K., 2022). Regardless of whether the speech is good or bad, “freedom of speech” should be an equal right of every citizen, and there is no excuse for the government to infringe upon the legitimate right of citizens to speak, which creates a dilemma of choosing free speech or governance. As a third-world country with a different social system from other countries, China’s system is influenced by its cultural background allowing the government to have a stricter grip on the Internet. Freedom of expression still exists on China’s internet platforms. However, there is another feature that is of more significant concern. Personal privacy is left in the hands of the platforms once the user has uploaded it to each platform, as Chinese internet use requires each user to upload their ID card for actual name internet use. So while the platforms manage user data, the government has the power to view the data. 2022 Didi illegally sold user privacy information to the US government for 1.2billion. Data security, as well as the security of personal privacy online, is causing unease among users. Governments should moderate problematic speech without compromising freedom of expression and should not control the privacy of users’ personal information, which is a violation of individual privacy.
Australian Government – Action
Individual users, platforms and governments should do their part and join forces to prevent the spread of problematic information. To stop haterd, harassing, cyberbullying causing upset to internet users the Australian government has used the issuing of laws to protect users.
The Australian government has issued laws to strictly regulate the posting problematic content such as cyberbullying, harassment, etc.
Federal Government introduce new cyberbullying and online abuse laws| 7NEWS by 7NEWS Australia All rights reserved. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlR9wEBx5SQ
Reference
Brannon, V. C., & Novak, W. K. (2022). Online Content Moderation and Government Coercion (LSB10742). Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports and Issue. https://heinonline-org.ezproxy.library.sydney.edu.au/HOL/Page?handle=hein.crs%2Fgoveftc0001&collection=congrec
Los Angeles Times. (2020, March 19). Trump calls coronavirus ‘the Chinese virus’. [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pjsx94m8qA
Smith, P., Steffgen, G., & Sittichai, R. (2013). The nature of cyberbullying, and an international network. In Smith, P., & Steffgen, G. (Eds.), Cyberbullying through the New Media: Findings from an international network (pp. 1-19). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203799079
7NEWS Australia. (2021, February 24). Federal Government introduce new cyberbullying and online abuse laws| 7NEWS. [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlR9wEBx5SQ