Suchergebnisse

Intro -- CHAPTER 1 -- CHAPTER 2 -- CHAPTER 3 -- CHAPTER 4 -- CHAPTER 5 -- Introduction -- Chapter 1- Bullies in Cyberspace -- Chapter 2- Profile of a Bully -- Chapter 3- How to Protect Yourself from a Cyberbully -- Chapter 4 - The Impact of Cyberbullying -- Chapter 5- Cyberbullying and the Law -- Glossary -- For More Information -- For Further Reading -- Bibliography -- Index

With the delay of the Online Safety Bill, the UK should not abandon its obligations to protect children from online sexual exploitation and abuse, says Awaz Raoof, head of law and programmes at Coram International

The rapid evolution of digital technology has brought both opportunities and risks, particularly for adolescents navigating the online world. This paper delves into the significance of preventive online safety education tailored for teenagers. It explores the current landscape of online threats, encompassing cyberbullying, privacy breaches, and exposure to inappropriate content, among others. Additionally, it evaluates existing educational approaches, emphasizing the need for a proactive, multifaceted strategy to equip teenagers with the necessary skills and knowledge to safely navigate the digital sphere. The proposed preventive education model integrates elements of digital literacy, critical thinking, and responsible online behavior. Furthermore, it discusses potential challenges in implementing such programs and suggests collaborative efforts among educators, parents, and policymakers to ensure comprehensive online safety education for teenagers, fostering a safer and more secure digital environment for the next generation.

In a similar way that social platforms are attempting to moderate CSEA content, authorities are struggling to develop enforcement at scale. This challenge underscores the pressing need for a paradigm shift in how federal enforcement strategies are conceived and implemented.
The post Child Online Safety Enforcement at Scale appeared first on American Enterprise Institute - AEI.

Keeping in touch -- Social media history -- Facebook -- Instant messaging and microblogging -- Sharing snaps -- Connecting to social media -- How information spreads -- The business of social media -- Signing up and starting out -- Keeping it private -- Smart, safe social media -- Social media issues -- Cyberbullying -- Glossary -- Further resources -- Index

Commentary: It took approximately 6 seconds, with 27 votes against 14 on the 16 May 2018 at 5:03pm for the Fiji Parliament to pass the Online Safety Bill (Fijian Parliament, 2018b). Thereafter, the Bill came into force as the Online Safety Act, 2018 (Fijian Government, 2018), despite concerns about its impact on free speech. This commentary examines how the public was conditioned by certain prominent actors, such as the Attorney-General and Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) chair, with support from government-aligned media. The Online Safety Bill had been touted as legislation designed to protect Fijians from harmful online activities (Doviverata, 2018; Nacei, 2018). However, the Bill's implementation was preceded by a set of supportive media-facilitated narratives that seems almost too convenient. This commentary scrutinises the series of media facilitated narratives that justified the Online Safety Act. The discussion briefly examines the connection between the media, blogs and social media in Fiji. It then explores the media facilitated narratives to provide a brief critique of the Act as a so-called 'Trojan Horse' for safety while risking responsible political free speech. Finally, it seeks to answer whether it is about online 'Safety' alone, or 'Regulation' of online media.

The Online Safety Act (OSA) has now become law, marking a significant milestone in platform regulation in the United Kingdom. The OSA introduces fresh obligations for technology firms to address illegal online content and activities, covering child sexual exploitation, fraud, and terrorism, adding the UK to the array of jurisdictions that have recently introduced new online safety and platform accountability regulations. However, the OSA is notably short on specifics. In this post, we dissect key aspects of the OSA structure and draw comparisons with similar legislation, including the EU Digital Services Act (DSA).

In recent years, speech inciting hatred, peddling dissemination, and encouraging self-harm has proliferated on social-media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, prompting calls for regulation to force platforms to tackle these challenges more aggressively. One of the most ambitious proposals is the UK's own Online Safety Bill, which looks likely to be passed (in some form) by the current government and will grant Ofcom substantial new powers over social media. Yet the Bill is highly controversial, prompting concerns over censorship of legitimate speech. What will this regulatory regime look like in practice? Will it effectively prevent harm? And is there merit to the concern that it will undermine free speech? To confront these issues and more, we are joined by leading experts and practitioners from academia, civil society, and Ofcom itself.

This week we're looking at Twitter, the Online Safety Bill, and the limits of free speech. Is it a good thing that Twitter is promoting free speech - or would more regulation be better? How much of a problem is disinformation for society and democracy? Might there even be a moral duty for social media platforms – or the state – to tackle disinformation and otherwise harmful speech?