This paper explores possible regulatory structures for content governance outside the United States and identifies questions that require further discussion. It builds off recent developments on this topic, including legislation proposed or passed into law by governments, as well as scholarship that explains the various content governance approaches that have been adopted in the past and may be taken in the future.2 Its overall goal is to help frame a path forward—taking into consideration the views not only of policymakers and private companies, but also civil society and the people who use Facebook’s platform and services.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
LinkedIn Marketing Solutions Affluent Millennials Research Whitepaperrun_frictionless
Affluent millennials are optimistic about the future of the economy and their own financial success. They are ambitious, setting goals of starting businesses, buying homes, and traveling abroad. While taking on some debt, they also save a high percentage of their income each month. Affluent millennials want control over their own financial decisions and research options independently, but still value guidance from financial advisors. They expect financial companies to engage with them through social media channels.
Renoir powering successful digital transformationrun_frictionless
A good plan is the backbone of every succesful DX. The framework we're detailing in this section has been distilled from our years of experience implementing digital transformation initiatives. The following pages highlight the key stages of a successful DX initiative.
*Define & Analyse
*Plan
*Execute
*Implement
*Continue to improve
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Klarna, the leading global payments and shopping service, and its industry-wide Influencer Council, have released their Influencer Marketing Whitepaper to serve as a guide for influencers and brands to advertise online responsibly.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
The Inclusive Fintech 50 applicant pool provides new insights into inclusion-focused fintech, itself a subset of the fintech universe. Early-stage inclusive fintechs are developing innovative products, services, business models, and distribution channels to provide solutions for underserved segments. Yet these startups require capital and other resources in order to reach the world’s 3 billion financially underserved people. By highlighting these high-potential companies, we hope to support the efforts of investors, banking partners, and other fintechs working towards a financially inclusive world.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
The marketing world’s intense focus on analytics, of late, hasn’t always led to better performance — because, while it’s easy to collect data, it’s difficult to turn it into deep insight. This Insight Center covered content that included a leading practitioner company’s reinvention of market research, a framework for measuring what your customers actually value and will pay for, and a toolkit approach to defining the customer’s “job to be done.”
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Account Based Marketing (ABM) is when you implement highly customized marketing campaigns where each account is considered to be a market of one. ABM uses the latest technology to help you send the right messages to influencers who are actively researching products like yours.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
The document outlines Google's Cloud Adoption Framework, which provides a structured approach for organizations to assess their cloud maturity and plan their journey to the cloud. The framework includes the Cloud Maturity Scale, which measures an organization's readiness across four themes (Learn, Lead, Scale, Secure) and three phases (Tactical, Strategic, Transformational). It also includes epics which define the workstreams needed to progress through the phases. The framework helps organizations understand their current state, set goals, and implement a cloud adoption program tailored to their needs.
Top 8 digital transformation trends shaping 2021run_frictionless
In a world that’s increasingly dependent on digital, IT’s role is more critical than ever. To meet rising demands, organizations are accelerating their digital transformation. This report identifies the top 8 technology trends that will face CIOs, IT leaders, and organizations in their digital transformation journey in 2021.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Marketing to Account Based Marketing Better, Effective and Rewardingrun_frictionless
Account-based marketing is a practice that enables B2B marketers to drive more revenue by focusing their marketing and communications efforts on the accounts (companies) that have the most potential to become customers.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Many corporations recognize their future depends on digital transformation. Earley Information Science outlines the 4 step process for building a roadmap to transformation.
Accenture Communications Industry 2021 - Connectivity Optimizeraccenture
The document discusses strategies for telecommunications companies to optimize connectivity operations called the "Connectivity Optimizer" play. It describes embracing technologies like AI, analytics, cloud, and digital tools to become more efficient and effective. This would transform operations to address cost pressures and create conditions for innovation. A deeper dive into the Connectivity Optimizer play and other value plays can be found at the listed website.
Digital Transformation ( DT) – the use of technology to radically improve and differentiate performance or reach of enterprises is becoming a hot topic for companies across the globe. Executives in all industries are using digital advances such as Analytic, Mobility, Social media and smart embedded devices and improving their use of traditional technologies such as ERP – to change customer relationships, internal processes, and value propositions. We continue to see how fast digital technology disrupted media industries in the past decade and it now spreading to all businesses irrespective of the domain and sectors.
How can top / senior management successfully lead digital transformation? While we all know and urge the team to get started on the digital transformation journey , few tell how to do it. This book gives a clear “ How” part .
I have also given in the summary few good case studies where digitization has impacted the business outcomes like Burberry , Asian Paints, Nike, Codelco, Starbucks , UPS etc.
The how part –Leading digital transformation
• Sharing a digital transformation vision across the enterprise ( not in piece mail – all businesses across the group need to envision the journey and be in sync)
• Gaining critical mass – inclusiveness
• Frame the digital challenges
• Focus investment on resources
• Sustaining the transformation
An excellent one to read.
Health Experience: The difference between loyalty & leavingaccenture
This document discusses factors that influence consumer loyalty and engagement in healthcare. It finds:
- Ease of navigation is the top reason people switch providers, while experience factors are the main reason for switching payers.
- Younger generations switch providers more and value experience over cost. They will be important future decision-makers.
- People expect access to convenient services through personalized journeys and digital tools that match their needs.
- Those who find providers/payers easy to work with, are highly digital engaged, and trust their organizations are most loyal.
- To drive loyalty, organizations must focus on access, ease of doing business, digital engagement, and building trust.
The document provides a template for creating a business case to invest in a CRM (customer relationship management) solution. It outlines sections to include such as an executive summary, opportunity overview, assumptions, business impact analysis, risks, and a recommendation. The template helps make the case for how a CRM can solve problems around customer satisfaction, cost-effective marketing, productivity, revenue growth, and sales cycle times. It provides guidance on completing the template with key details like costs, benefits, timelines, stakeholders, and risks to gain approval for the CRM investment.
Transforming the Industry That Transformed the Worldaccenture
The document discusses 8 trends transforming the high tech industry, including the shift to as-a-service models, supply chain volatility, accelerated cloud adoption, and the need to integrate AI/ML. It outlines 5 imperatives for high tech companies, such as adopting recurring revenue models and accelerating industry convergence. High tech leaders are focusing on revenue growth and see as-a-service and digital enablers like AI/ML and 5G as fuel for unlocking new opportunities.
Increased regulatory pressure and operational complexity have created a need for a new approach to compliance.
Accenture is not and will not be deemed to be providing the Client with any legal, regulatory or financial advice as part of Accenture’s performance of the Services, production of the Deliverables and/or content in this presentation and Accenture shall have no liability resulting from such matters.
This document summarizes findings from McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.org's seventh annual research on women in the workplace. Some key findings include:
- 423 companies participated with over 12 million employees surveyed on their workplace experiences.
- Women's representation has declined year-over-year in news and media companies across most levels. Women of color continue to lose ground.
- Women, especially women of color, report higher rates of burnout and are more likely to experience disrespectful microaggressions. They also lack effective allies.
- Women leaders have taken on greater responsibilities supporting employee wellbeing and diversity, though this important work often goes unrecognized.
McKinsey | When Things Get Complex: Complex Systems, Challenges and Where to ...Intland Software GmbH
This talk was presented by Georg Doll (McKinsey Digital Munich) at Intland Connect: Annual User Conference 2020 on 22 Oct 2020. To learn more, visit: https://intland.com/intland-connect-annual-user-conference-2020/
This document summarizes a research paper on applying a human rights framework to online disinformation and political discourse. The paper examines how online campaign techniques like disinformation, exploiting social media algorithms, and microtargeting based on personal data are distorting democratic processes. It argues that international human rights law provides a framework to balance responses to these issues with protections for civil liberties. The paper analyzes how rights to privacy, expression, and participation in public affairs relate to state and platform regulation of online political content and personal data use. It recommends changes like ensuring user consent for data use, more transparency around content policies and targeting, and considering users' rights to privacy and autonomy in platform designs.
This document discusses issues around personal privacy and data collection online. It argues that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in communications, and that corporations collecting user data have a responsibility to protect privacy. While targeted advertising supports free services, user data could also be misused. The document proposes that services could implement privacy protections like encryption by default to give users informed consent over how their data is used and ensure data security. Balancing privacy concerns with the need for advertising revenue models is complex, but modern users increasingly demand stronger privacy controls from online corporations.
The Oversight Board was established by Meta (formerly Facebook) in 2020 to provide independent oversight of content moderation decisions on Facebook and Instagram. It is made up of 23 members from around the world and makes binding decisions on specific cases referred to it by Meta. Some of the key issues the Oversight Board has addressed include the suspension of Donald Trump's accounts, content moderation related to conflicts like in Israel/Palestine, and recommending Meta improve transparency around content removals and appeals. The Board also publishes policy recommendations and strategic priorities focused on issues like elections, gender issues, and algorithmic transparency.
The document discusses the dilemma governments face regarding social media intelligence (SOCMINT). On one hand, SOCMINT could provide valuable intelligence to keep the public safe, but it challenges conceptions of privacy and may not fit within existing legal frameworks. A balance must be struck between security, privacy, and maintaining public support for intelligence activities.
Media Regulation & Democracy: "Hey! Regulator! Leave those Hyperlocals alone!" Damian Radcliffe
Book chapter ‘Hey! Regulator! Leave those Hyperlocals alone!’, from The Democratic Society,
‘Media Regulation & Democracy‘. Submitted to the Leveson Inquiry (a judicial public inquiry into the
culture, practices and ethics of the British press) in 2012 and supported by The Carnegie Trust.
My chapter was summarized by Roy Greenslade in the media pages of the Guardian: http://bit.ly/1ijBCnY
I. INTRODUCTIONA. Purpose of DocumentThis paper1 was des.docxwilcockiris
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of Document
This paper1 was designed to accompany the Model Policy on
Social Media established by the IACP National Law Enforcement
Policy Center. This paper provides essential background materi-
al and supporting documentation to impart greater understand-
ing of the developmental philosophy and implementation
requirements for the model policy. This material will be of value
to law enforcement executives in their efforts to tailor the model
policy to the requirements and the circumstances of their com-
munities and their law enforcement agencies.
B. Background
Personal Internet access has grown exponentially over the last
decade, facilitating the growth in popularity of the World Wide
Web and, more recently, social media. For the purpose of this dis-
cussion paper, social media is defined as a category of Internet-
based resources that integrate user-generated content and user
participation. Social media tools have become synonymous with
popular culture and new waves of personal communication.
People of all ages and organizations of all types are using these
tools like never before.
Social media has many uses for government agencies includ-
ing law enforcement agencies. The characteristics of community
collaboration and interactive communication that are at the core
of social media, lend directly to the core of democratic culture,
and allow for positive community interaction and effective deliv-
ery of services. Community policing, investigations, and other
strategic initiatives can all be enhanced with the effective use of
social media.
The increase in personal social media usage across demo-
graphics also means that more and more law enforcement per-
sonnel are engaging in these tools on a personal level. Misuse of
social media can lead to harsh consequences for both the indi-
vidual and his or her agency.
The IACP Model Policy on Social Media was established in order
to assist law enforcement agencies in developing appropriate
procedures and guidelines for both official department use of
social media tools as well as personal use by agency employees.
The purpose of this discussion paper is to educate law enforce-
ment managers and executives on the uses and abuses of social
media. As the age of technology continues to expand, the use of
social media should be supervised closely in order to ensure eth-
ical, effective, and lawful police applications.
C. Policy Development
In response to the rise in use of social media, police depart-
ments should draft and implement policies that regulate social
media use among employees, as well as determine proper and
effective department use. The model social media policy was
developed to establish an agency’s position on the utility and
management of social media tools as well as provide guidelines
for personal usage of social media for agency personnel.
As noted above, many of the legal issues surrounding social
media have not yet been settled in the court sy.
The document discusses issues around internet censorship including the controversies surrounding censorship and differing views on whether restricting certain materials benefits society or limits freedom of expression. It also outlines the mission of the Global Network Initiative to respect freedom of expression and privacy through frameworks to ensure accountability of internet and communication technology companies. The debate around internet censorship and what role, if any, governments should play in regulating online content remains ongoing.
A human rights approach to the mobile networkDr Lendy Spires
This document discusses a human rights approach to the mobile internet. It argues that internet policy should aim to maximize the empowering potential of mobile phones while also promoting universal access to high-speed internet via both mobile phones and computers. The mobile internet can advance human rights by enabling citizen journalism, crowdsourcing, and sharing information ubiquitously. However, challenges like cost, usability, unequal access to content, and network architecture must be addressed. An ideal policy balances rights while empowering all people to access and share information via any device.
IACP Social Media Concepts and Issues Paper September 2010Twittercrisis
This document provides an overview of social media use by law enforcement agencies and personnel. It discusses official department uses such as investigations, community outreach, and recruitment. It emphasizes the need for authorization and administration of official accounts. Regarding legal aspects, it outlines how the First Amendment applies differently depending on whether statements are made in an official capacity or as a private citizen on matters of public concern. It also discusses how personal social media use by law enforcement personnel could potentially be detrimental to their department if sensitive information is revealed or conduct violates policy. The document aims to educate law enforcement on both establishing appropriate social media policies and using social media effectively and lawfully.
This document discusses various laws and regulations pertaining to social media. It begins by noting that individuals can be held liable under the laws of the country they post in. It then discusses protections for internet service providers from liability, as well as increasing legal cases involving Facebook, Twitter, and freedom of speech. Examples are provided of cases involving social media posts. The document also discusses international differences in social media laws and regulations, as well as guidelines around prosecuting cases involving social media in the UK and US laws around internet indecency.
This document discusses various laws and regulations pertaining to social media. It begins by noting that individuals can be held liable under the laws of the country they post in. It then discusses protections for internet service providers from liability, as well as increasing legal cases involving Facebook, Twitter, and freedom of speech. Examples of cases like Tatro v. University of Minnesota are provided. Regulations around terms of service for platforms like Facebook and emerging issues on Twitter are also summarized. The document then discusses international social media laws and censorship in countries like China, as well as international cyber crime laws. It concludes by examining prior restraint laws and terrorism, guidelines for prosecution of social media cases in the UK, and indecency laws in the US.
Network neutrality has been at the center of intense political discussions about Internet regulation. Net neutrality is the principle that all content on the Internet should be equally available to users without discrimination by service providers. Establishing legal protections for net neutrality is a necessary component to providing equitable access to online educational materials and services.
This document discusses using social media and online tools to engage citizens in government. It provides examples of governments publishing regulatory breaches, facilitating citizen-health service dialogue, and allowing input on bike lanes. Challenges include moving from transactions to relationships and increasing citizen effort from passive to active engagement. New models discussed include volunteer technical communities that helped with disaster response in Haiti and long-term infrastructure for online government-citizen engagement using tools like wikis, polls, crowdsourcing, and maps.
Discussion 1 By Karthik KondlaThe capability to connect indivi.docxcuddietheresa
Discussion 1: By Karthik Kondla:
The capability to connect individuals around the world through the spread of internet solutions has been described by the World Bank to be vital in promoting accessibility to information as well as lifting people from poverty (Langley, 2016). According to the data released on the use of internet, it is estimated that around 3.5 billion people were making use of the internet by 2016 (Clement, 2017). Based upon the world's population record, the above stats mean that about 45 percent of the worldwide population were accessing the internet in 2016. With slowly rise on the planet's population in the last 3 years paired with the penetration of internet usage, there is no question that the use of internet will additionally increase in the next decades. Nevertheless, the continued use internet likewise includes its share of negative problems such as increased cyberbullying, cyberterrorism, dependency, and also erosion of social morals amongst teens who spend a lot of their time on unlawful sites such as pornographic sites. Such unfavorable concerns associated with internet use necessitate the requirement for federal governments to control making use of internet in their nations.
If I was to have absolute power to control the internet as well as its material, one thing I will do to promote sanity as well as morality among internet users will certainly be to completely obstruct various websites with fierce as well as unethical material. I am particular that by obstructing these websites, it will be very impossible for users to access such unlawful websites, a technique which is usually applied by Chinese government (King, Frying Pan, & Roberts, 2017). The other method that I will certainly make use of to control the internet as well as its web content is to develop a law which forbids minor people from accessing internet sites which are viewed to be past their age restriction. Finally, I will also call for all designers of these websites to filter and also check the materials of the information they post so that it does not interfere with the welfare of other groups. By carrying out these choices, I believe I will take care of to make the internet the most effective platform of accessing information and also entirely prevent individuals from accessing unwanted, unethical, or fierce information which can trigger violence, spread hate and also stereotype, or even decrease the principles amongst people.
Discussion 2: By Atilla Genc:
The internet has become part of our lives and we are exposed to many things such as easy access to knowledge and many other conveniences. The global connection has been enhanced by the internet in many ways as friends and families can interact and socialize. However, the internet has adverse effects too on the same people who use it. The internet made so many changes on how things are done including political power as well as social power and relations, (Flew, et.al, 2017). Pers ...
Social media: Councils, citizens and service transformationIngrid Koehler
A discussion paper presented to the Local Government Delivery Council on how social media is changing the relationship between citizens and local public services, making the link between performance, insight and service transformation to achieve efficiency
2012: NJ GMIS: The Double Edge Sword of the Social NetworkCarol Spencer
Social networks are, for the most part, free and easy to use. Their use has proliferated and is necessary for governments to communicate with constituents. But, with that use comes the need for policies and policing of the use of social media.
Tim Berners-Lee reflects on 30 years since creating the World Wide Web and envisions its future. While the web has enabled opportunity and connectivity, it also enables harm like crime and misinformation. To improve the web, its systems must be redesigned to change perverse incentives and minimize unintended negative consequences, and a new "Contract for the Web" aims to establish norms to make the web open, accessible, and for the public good.
The document discusses governmental control of the internet in authoritarian states. It summarizes that while the internet is seen as promoting globalization and free speech, authoritarian governments implement controls within their borders through technical filtering of content, shutting down of servers, and restrictive laws. The main goals of state intervention are to restrict published opinions and limit active participation in political discussions, while allowing more open discussion of economic and cultural issues. While complete control of the global internet is not possible, national borders allow successful regulation of internet activities.
Barack obama connecting and empowering all americans through technology and...Dr Lendy Spires
Barack Obama's technology and innovation plan aims to connect all Americans through expanded broadband access and an open internet. It seeks to create a more transparent democracy by harnessing technologies to open up government and encourage citizen participation. The plan establishes a Chief Technology Officer role to modernize government and ensure Americans' privacy and security in the digital age.
Presented to the New Media Group, Victorian Government (Melbourne, March 2010), by Martin Stewart-Weeks, Director, Public Sector (Asia-Pacific), Internet Business Solutions Group
Similar to Charting a Way Forward Online Content Regulation (20)
The 25 Most Beautiful B2B White Papers On The Planetrun_frictionless
Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Linkedin, and Docusign. Which company has the sexiest #B2B #whitepapers?
Cast your vote. Which one do you ❤️ ?
https://runfrictionless.com/blog/25-beautiful-b2b-white-papers/
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Pharma Marketing: Get Started on Creating Great Customer Experiences with Jou...run_frictionless
Customer journeys are highly strategic and – in a competitive and regulated environment like life sciences – understanding them can literally make or break the success of a new drug launch, as well as efforts to achieve long-term loyalty and adherence. For pharma, added complexities start with the definition of the “customer.” While patients are the end consumers, pharma has more direct relationships with prescribing health care providers (HCPs), who significantly influence the patient experience and most certainly determine the successful marketing of medications.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Azure Cost Management’s Cost Analysis tool helps you break down the details of your Azure spend—with this tool, you can take a more in-depth
look into exactly what everything costs and do all kinds of grouping and filtering across your resources.
This is the tool to use if you want to see what a service is currently costing you, or if you’re trying to figure out why your bill is higher than you
anticipated. Remember, visibility of your Azure spend is very important and should always be something to keep top of mind.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
AWS has the services to help you build sophisticated applications with increased flexibility, scalability and reliability. Whether you're looking for compute power, database storage, content delivery, or other functionality, with AWS you pay only for the individual services you need, for as long as you use them, without complex licensing. AWS offers you a variety of pricing models for over 160 cloud services. You only pay for the services you consume, and once you stop using them, there are no additional costs or termination fees. This whitepaper provides an overview of how AWS pricing works across some of the most widely used services. The latest pricing information for each AWS service is available at http:// aws.amazon.com/pricing/.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
The AWS Well-Architected Framework helps you understand the pros and cons of decisions you make while building systems on AWS. By using the Framework you will learn architectural best practices for designing and operating reliable, secure, efficient, and cost-effective systems in the cloud. It provides a way for you to consistently measure your architectures against best practices and identify areas for improvement. The process for reviewing an architecture is a constructive conversation about architectural decisions, and is not an audit mechanism. We believe that having well-architected systems greatly increases the likelihood of business success.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Electronic contracts and electronic signatures under Australian lawrun_frictionless
An electronic signature is a signature which is applied by electronic means to a document in electronic form. Australian law generally recognises that deeds and agreements can be executed via electronic means and by way of an electronic signature.
www.runfrictionless.com
Connecting with Sidecar is the same as connecting any external display. Select the AirPlay menu item in the menu bar, then select iPad. The AirPlay icon will turn into an iPad icon while Sidecar is in use. Simply pull down from the iPad icon on the menu bar to see a host of options: Mirror Display, Hide or Show Sidebar, Show or Hide Touch Bar, Open Displays Preferences, and Open Sidecar Preferences.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Google's guide to innovation: How to unlock strategy, resources and technologyrun_frictionless
Organizations are facing unprecedented change and challenges stemming from a confluence of natural and artificial conditions. These forces are driving many to rethink the tools and technologies they use, and the places they need to be, to grow, and to innovate.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Google Cloud Industries: The impact of COVID-19 on manufacturersrun_frictionless
After facing severe headwinds from COVID-19, ranging from decreased orders to negative impacts on operations, manufacturers around the world have started to revamp their operating models and supply chain strategies—and now feel more prepared in their ability to successfully navigate future pandemics, according to new research released from Google Cloud.
www.runfrictionless.com
Companies are realizing incredible benefits by incorporating ChatOps into their incident management workflows. Slack channels provide hyper-effective means to alert teams of issues, take immediate action, and collaborate with clarity and urgency. It is for this reason that companies like Opsgenie, PagerDuty, and VictorOps have invested in integrating their incident management applications into Slack.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Journey mapping in finance requires specific domain expertise. As almost every step has layers of compliance, ALM, legal, IT security, and other requirements, you need to consider all possible issues.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Strengthening Operational Resilience in Financial Services by Migrating to Go...run_frictionless
Operational resilience is a key area of focus for financial services firms, and could be thought of as the next goal in addressing systemic risk in the financial services sector. Regulators are also increasingly focused on this risk: it is recognised that despite many years of bolstering financial stability by enhancing financial resilience following the financial crisis, the shocks that come from the operational side can be as significant as the shocks from the financial side.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Reconciliation is an essential control function in financial services, aimed at eliminating operational risk that can lead to fraud, fines or in the worst case, the failure of a whole firm. And yet, since an early push in the early 2000s that automated parts of the very back-end of the system (cash and custody), innovation in this area has stalled and operations reliant on people power and spreadsheets are prevalent.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Security and compliance is an ongoing process, not a steady state. It is constantly maintained, enhanced, and verified by highly-skilled, experienced and trained personnel. We strive to keep software and hardware technologies up to date through robust processes. To help keep Office 365 security at the top of the industry, we use processes such as the Security Development Lifecycle; we also employ techniques that throttle traffic and prevent, detect, and mitigate breaches.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Today, Information Security has to be at the heart of the modern SAAS organization. At Speakap, we’ve always held the view that our customers should own their data, and thus have always fiercely protected data privacy, so we see the increased attention on these topics as being great for all companies and consumers.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Constellation’s technology will enable the advancement of the digital revolution by creating an ecosystem facilitating decentralized applications throughout a scalable distributed network. Constellation acts as a centerpiece framework that other applications can integrate with, without giving away data security and application dependency. Furthermore, our goal is to leverage existing technologies in distributed computing, big data and machine learning that are widely used among developer communities, and apply them to a decentralized distributed network.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
DIGITAL MARKETING FOR FIXED OPS: Tips & Techniques for Your Dealershiprun_frictionless
Your dealership is sitting on a goldmine that is ready to be mined. You can stake your claim and get more from a $400B industry without changing how your dealership operations are run.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Can you think of any business process digitizing so fast and creating as many new trends as Digital Marketing? Keeping up with all the changes, challenges and opportunities is now, more than ever, the key for successful companies, which grow with the trends.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
Pharma Marketing: Get Started on Creating Great Customer Experiences with Jou...run_frictionless
A well-defined customer journey strategy is critical to customer experience management (CEM) initiatives.1 Yet most pharmaceutical companies have not followed the lead of industries like consumer packaged goods, retail, or travel and hospitality, which pioneered and mastered the art and science of personalized, cross-channel customer journeys. While recognizing that customer journeys are often more complex for pharma than for other sectors, it’s imperative for life sciences to develop and apply journey strategies similar to those of other industries when transforming customer experiences.
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
White Paper: successful with marketing automationrun_frictionless
Marketing automation is more than merely automating your workflows, even though – as the name suggests – this clearly is the point. However, if you just do what you are doing now but with the help of a fancy tool, the results will not be that dierent. Nor does marketing automation mean mass marketing, i. e. providing the same content to all the leads you have got, regardless of their engagement history, progression in the sales process, or preferences, and hoping some will bite
https://runfrictionless.com/b2b-white-paper-service/
AI and Best Use Cases for Your Personal Life.pptxBrian Frerichs
THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE TOPIC AND THE KEY AREAS THAT WILL BE COVERED IN THE PRESENTATION ON HOW AI CAN BE LEVERAGED FOR PERSONAL LIFE APPLICATIONS.
Maximise your Business Potential: Annual Planning Workshopchris908327
Are you striving to elevate your business to new heights? Prepare to transform your aspirations into actionable plans with our exclusive 90-Day Planning Workshop, meticulously designed for owners and managers of family and privately owned businesses. Led by Russell Cummings, Australia’s premier business coach from Shifft, this online workshop is your golden ticket to crafting a focused roadmap for the April to June 2024 quarter.
Why is Structural Engineering Critical in Disaster Preparedness and Resilienc...grouphirani24
Structural engineering forms the bedrock of resilient communities, especially in the face of natural disasters and unforeseen crises. At Hirani Group, our commitment to excellence in structural engineering services is rooted in the belief that robust infrastructure is fundamental to disaster preparedness and long-term resilience. Our team of dedicated professionals specializes in both residential and commercial structural engineering services, ensuring that every project is fortified against potential hazards and stands the test of time. In today’s unpredictable world, the role of structural engineering in disaster preparedness cannot be overstated.
A complete step-by-step guide on how to start,scale and monetize YouTube channels to start earning decent money online. This guide gives brief information on everything you need to know to get started with YouTube automation and scale it up as soon as possible.
Test Bank For Principles Of Cost Accounting, 17th Edition Edward J. Vander...kevinkariuki227
Test Bank For Principles Of Cost Accounting, 17th Edition Edward J. Vanderbeck Chapters 1 - 10, Complete
Test Bank For Principles Of Cost Accounting, 17th Edition Edward J. Vanderbeck Chapters 1 - 10, Complete
1. **Team Strength**:
- Seasoned discoverers with mineral finds of >$1Bn (silver), >42Mozs (gold), >12Blbs (copper)
- $8.75M recently raised for aggressive exploration
- 30% management ownership aligns interests
2. **High-Grade Discovery**:
- 2021 re-discovery: 75Moz at 980g/t AgEq (silver-zinc-lead)
- Objective: Prove continuity between high-grade discovery and existing gold-silver mine
- Potential for a gigantic, continuous deposit
3. **Proven Production Area**:
- Site of one of Alaska's first open-pit gold mines
- Existing 43-101 resource: ~500,000 oz AuEq, mostly indicated
4. **Carbonate Replacement Deposit (CRD) Advantages**:
- High grades, low mining costs
- Metallurgically simple, minimal environmental impact
- Strategic metals (Zn, Ga) could expedite permitting
5. **Massive Potential**:
- Two polymetallic deposits potentially linked
- Extensive mineralization corridor to be confirmed by drilling
Key Takeaway: High-grade discovery with potential for a giant, continuous CRD deposit, backed by a proven team and existing resources in a mining-friendly jurisdiction.
The Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) is the OMG industry standard for defining and orchestrating the flow of activities comprising end-to-end business processes. This live event will showcase the iterative creation and seamless exchange of BPMN models among different tools, highlighting the interoperability and sophistication of current BPMN technology. This showcase is an invaluable opportunity for professionals in the field to witness firsthand the advanced functionalities and collaborative potential of BPMN tools. Join us for an insightful exhibition of the latest advancements in business process management.
How Do Flange Adapters Work and Why Are They Essential?Texas Flange
Discover how flange adapters work and why they are essential for seamless pipe connections. Enhance efficiency and ensure leak-free operations with top-quality flange adapters.
The Matatag Curriculum of the Philippines for the School Year 2024-2025
The Matatag Curriculum is designed to strengthen and enhance the educational system in the Philippines, aiming to address existing challenges and better prepare students for the future. "Matatag" means "strong" or "resilient" in Filipino, reflecting the curriculum's focus on building a solid and adaptable foundation for students.
The curriculum is structured for elementary (Grades 1-6), junior high (Grades 7-10), and senior high school (Grades 11-12) levels, with a focus on foundational skills, specialized tracks, and real-world learning experiences. Overseen by the Department of Education (DepEd), the Matatag Curriculum aims to improve academic performance, equip students with 21st-century skills, and foster responsible citizenship.
The Matatag Curriculum of the Philippines for the School Year 2024-2025 focuses on strengthening and enhancing the educational system with the following key features:
Holistic Development: Addresses intellectual, emotional, social, and physical growth.
Learner-Centered Approach: Promotes active learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills.
Revised Content and Competencies: Updates subject matter to align with global standards.
Technology Integration: Incorporates digital literacy and technology in education.
Sustainability and Global Citizenship: Introduces environmental sustainability and responsible citizenship concepts.
Indigenous Knowledge and Culture: Integrates and respects indigenous practices.
Teacher Training and Development: Provides continuous professional development for educators.
Assessment and Evaluation: Utilizes various assessment methods to measure student progress.
Virtual Production Tool Set and Technologies Redefining Cinema.pdfvirtualproduction38
Discover how Virtual Production Tools and cutting-edge tech are revolutionizing filmmaking! Unleash creative freedom with virtual sets and in-camera VFX.
Qatar Airways Kuwait Office serves as a crucial hub for travelers in Kuwait seeking premium air travel services. Located conveniently in the heart of Kuwait City, the office offers a range of services including flight bookings, ticketing, and assistance with itinerary planning. Dedicated staff are available to provide personalized support, ensuring a seamless travel experience. The office also offers information on Qatar Airways' extensive network, luxury amenities, and special offers. Known for its exceptional customer service, the Qatar Airways Kuwait Office is committed to delivering a high standard of service and addressing any travel-related inquiries promptly. For business and leisure travelers alike, it’s the gateway to exploring global destinations with ease.
The standard operating procedure aims to align all the Digital Marketing Efforts into a single channel and help to measure the effectiveness of each department.
This SOP applies to all digital marketing activities including
• Social Media Marketing (SMM)
• Search Engine Marketing (SEM)
• Digital Ads
• Web Development
• SEO
• Email Marketing
• SMS Marketing
• Community Marketing (Whatsapp/ Viber etc.)
• Paid Marketing
• Native Marketing
• Analytics Tools
Network Observability – 5 Best Platforms for ObservabilityGauriKale30
Constant changes in network traffic and configurations require understanding the IT network for reliability. Network observability with telemetry, AI/ML, and AIOps gathers and analyzes data, predicts issues, and automates responses
Network Observability – 5 Best Platforms for Observability
Charting a Way Forward Online Content Regulation
1. C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D 1
Online Content
Regulation
C H A R T I N G A WAY F O R WA R D
Monika Bickert
V P, C O N T E N T P O L I C Y
F E B R U A R Y 2 0 2 0
2. C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D 2
I. A New Governance Challenge
II. Four Key Questions
09
Q U E S T I O N 1
How can content regulation best achieve the goal of
reducing harmful speech while preserving free expression?
10
Q U E S T I O N 2
How should regulation enhance the accountability of
internet platforms to the public?
13
Q U E S T I O N 3
Should regulation require internet companies to meet
certain performance targets?
16
Q U E S T I O N 4
Should regulation define which “harmful content” should
be prohibited on internet platforms?
III. Principles for Future Regulators
IV. The Beginning of a Conversation
End Notes
03
06
19
21
22
Table of Contents
3. 3
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Billions of people have come online in the past decade, gaining unprecedented
access to information and the ability to share their ideas and opinions with a wide
audience. Global connectivity has improved economies, grown businesses, reunited
families, raised money for charity, and helped bring about political change. At the
same time, the internet has also made it easier to find and spread content that could
contribute to harm, like terror propaganda. While this type of speech is not new,
society’s increased reliance on the internet has shifted the power among those who
control and are affected by mass communication.
For centuries, political leaders, philosophers, and activists have wrestled with the
question of how and when governments should place limits on freedom of
expression to protect people from content that can contribute to harm. Increasingly,
privately run internet platforms are making these determinations, as more speech
flows through their systems. Consistent with human rights norms, internet platforms
generally respect the laws of the countries in which they operate, and they are
also free to establish their own rules about permissible expression, which are often
more restrictive than laws. As a result, internet companies make calls every day
that influence who has the ability to speak and what content can be shared on
their platform.
Problems arise when people do not understand the decisions that are being made
or feel powerless when those decisions impact their own speech, behavior, or
experience. People may expect similar due process channels to those that they
01
A New Governance
Challenge
4. 4
01 | A New Governance Challenge
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
enjoy elsewhere in modern society. For example, people in liberal democracies may
expect platforms to draft content standards with user and civil society input in mind,
as well as the ability to seek redress if they feel a decision was made in error. People
are able to register preferences through market signals by moving to other
platforms, but they may not be satisfied by this as their only option.
As a result, private internet platforms are facing increasing questions about how
accountable and responsible they are for the decisions they make. They hear from
users who want the companies to reduce abuse but not infringe upon freedom
of expression. They hear from governments, who want companies to remove not
only illegal content but also legal content that may contribute to harm, but make
sure that they are not biased in their adoption or application of rules. Faced
with concerns about bullying or child sexual exploitation or terrorist recruitment,
for instance, governments may find themselves doubting the effectiveness
of a company’s efforts to combat such abuse or, worse, unable to satisfactorily
determine what those efforts are.
This tension has led some governments to pursue regulation over the speech
allowed online and companies’ practices for content moderation. The approaches
under consideration depend on each country’s unique legal and historical traditions.
In the United States, for example, the First Amendment protects a citizen’s ability to
engage in dialogue online without government interference except in the narrowest
of circumstances. Citizens in other countries often have different expectations about
freedom of expression, and governments have different expectations about platform
accountability. Unfortunately, some of the laws passed so far do not always
strike the appropriate balance between speech and harm, unintentionally pushing
platforms to err too much on the side of removing content.
Facebook has therefore joined the call for new regulatory frameworks for online
content—frameworks that ensure companies are making decisions about online
speech in a way that minimizes harm but also respects the fundamental right
to free expression. This balance is necessary to protect the open internet, which
is increasingly threatened—even walled off—by some regimes.
Facebook wants to be a constructive partner to governments as they weigh the
most effective, democratic, and workable approaches to address online content
governance. As Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a recent op-ed:
It’s impossible to remove all harmful content from the Internet, but when
people use dozens of different sharing services—all with their own policies
and processes—we need a more standardized approach … Regulation
could set baselines for what’s prohibited and require companies to build
systems for keeping harmful content to a bare minimum.1
5. 5
01 | A New Governance Challenge
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
This paper explores possible regulatory structures for content governance
outside the United States and identifies questions that require further discussion.
It builds off recent developments on this topic, including legislation proposed or
passed into law by governments, as well as scholarship that explains the various
content governance approaches that have been adopted in the past and may be
taken in the future.2
Its overall goal is to help frame a path forward—taking into
consideration the views not only of policymakers and private companies, but also
civil society and the people who use Facebook’s platform and services.
This debate will be central to shaping the character of the internet for decades
to come. If designed well, new frameworks for regulating harmful content can
contribute to the internet’s continued success by articulating clear, predictable, and
balanced ways for government, companies, and civil society to share responsibilities
and work together. Designed poorly, these efforts may stifle expression, slow
innovation, and create the wrong incentives for platforms.
6. 6
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Since the invention of the printing press, developments in communications
technology have always been met with calls for state action. In the case of internet
companies, however, it is uniquely challenging to develop regulation to ensure
accountability. There are four primary challenges.
1. Legal environments and speech norms vary.
Many internet companies have a global user base with a broad spectrum
of expectations about what expression should be permitted online and
how decision makers should be held accountable. The cross-border nature
of communication is also a defining feature of many internet platforms,
so companies generally maintain one set of global policies rather than
country-specific policies that would interfere with that experience.
2. Technology and speech are dynamic.
Internet services are varied and ever changing. Some are focused on
video or images, while some are primarily text. Some types of internet
communications are one-to-one and analogous to the private sphere,
while others are more like a town square or broadcasting—where thousands
or millions of people can access the content in question. Some services
are ephemeral, and some are permanent. Among these different interaction
types, norms for acceptable speech may vary. Just as people may say
things in the privacy of a family dinner conversation that they would not say
at a town hall meeting, online communities cultivate their own norms that
are enforced both formally and informally. All are constantly changing to
compete and succeed.
02
Four Key Questions
7. 7
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
3. Enforcement will always be imperfect.
Given the dynamic nature and scale of online speech, the limits of
enforcement technology, and the different expectations that people have
over their privacy and their experiences online, internet companies’
enforcement of content standards will always be imperfect. Their ability
to review speech for policy or legal violations will always be limited. Even
in a hypothetical world where enforcement efforts could perfectly track
language trends and identify likely policy violations, companies would still
struggle to apply policies because they lack context that is often necessary,
such as whether an exchange between two people is in jest or in anger, or
whether graphic content is posted for sadistic pleasure or to call attention
to an atrocity.
4. Companies are intermediaries, not speakers.
Publisher liability laws that punish the publication of illegal speech are
unsuitable for the internet landscape. Despite their best efforts to thwart
the spread of harmful content, internet platforms are intermediaries,
not the speakers, of such speech, and it would be impractical and harmful
to require internet platforms to approve each post before allowing it.
The ability of individuals to communicate without journalistic intervention
has been central to the internet’s growth and positive impact. Imposing
traditional publishing liability would seriously curtail that impact by limiting
the ability of individuals to speak. Companies seeking assurance that
their users’ speech is lawful would need to review and approve each post
before allowing it to appear on the site. Companies that could afford to
offer services under such a model would be incentivized to restrict service
to a limited set of users and err on the side of removing any speech close
to legal lines.
Legal experts have cautioned that holding internet companies liable for
the speech of their users could lead to the end of these services altogether.
As explained by Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel
at the American Civil Liberties Union, “There is no way you can have a
YouTube where somebody needs to watch every video. There is no way you
can have a Facebook if somebody needs to watch every post. There would
be no Google if someone had to check every search result.”3
Such liability
would stifle innovation as well as individuals’ freedom of expression. This
model’s flaws appear all the more clear in light of the significant efforts
many companies make to identify and remove harmful speech—efforts that
often require the protective shield of intermediary liability protection laws.
(Instead, as this paper explains, other models for regulating internet
platforms would better empower and encourage them to effectively address
harmful content.)
8. 8
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
These challenges suggest that retrofitting the rules that regulate offline
speech for the online world may be insufficient. Instead, new frameworks are
needed. This paper will put forward four questions that underpin the debate
about that framework:
01
How can content regulation best achieve the goal of reducing
harmful speech while preserving free expression?
02
How should regulation enhance the accountability of internet platforms?
03
Should regulation require internet companies to meet certain
performance targets?
04
Should regulation define which “harmful content” should be prohibited
on internet platforms?
9. 9
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
While governments have different thresholds for limiting speech, the general
goal of most content regulation is to reduce harmful speech while preserving free
expression. Broadly speaking, regulation could aim to achieve this goal in three
ways: (1) holding internet companies accountable for having certain systems and
procedures in place, (2) requiring companies meet specific performance targets
when it comes to content that violates their policies, or (3) requiring companies
to restrict specific forms of speech, even if the speech is not illegal. The discussion
of Questions 2, 3, and 4 will discuss these approaches in more detail.
Facebook generally takes the view that the first approach—requiring companies to
maintain certain systems and procedures—is the best way to ensure an appropriate
balancing of safety, freedom of expression, and other values. By requiring systems
such as user-friendly channels for reporting content or external oversight of
policies or enforcement decisions, and by requiring procedures such as periodic
public reporting of enforcement data, regulation could provide governments
and individuals the information they need to accurately judge social media
companies’ efforts.
Governments could also consider requiring companies to hit specific performance
targets, such as decreasing the prevalence of content that violates a site’s hate
speech policies, or maintaining a specified median response time to user or
government reports of policy violations. While such targets may have benefits, they
could also create perverse incentives for companies to find ways to decrease
enforcement burdens, perhaps by defining harmful speech more narrowly, making
it harder for people to report possible policy violations, or stopping efforts to
proactively identify violating content that has not been reported.
Finally, regulators could require that internet companies remove certain content—
beyond what is already illegal. Regulators would need to clearly define that content,
and the definitions would need to be different from the traditional legal definitions
that are applied through a judicial process where there is more time, more context,
and independent fact-finders.
These approaches are not mutually exclusive nor are they the only options.
However, they do represent some of the most common ideas that we have heard
in our conversations with policymakers, academics, civil society experts, and
regulators. The approach a government may pursue will depend on what sort of
platform behavior it wants to incentivize. Ultimately, the most important elements
of any system will be due regard for each of the human rights and values at stake,
as well as clarity and precision in the regulation.
Question 1: How can content regulation best
achieve the goal of reducing harmful speech while
preserving free expression?
10. 10
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
People in democratic societies are accustomed to being able to hold their
governments accountable for their decisions. When internet companies make
decisions that have an impact on people’s daily lives, those people expect the same
accountability. This is why internet companies, in their conversations with people
using their services, face questions like, “Who decides your content standards?,”
“Why did you remove my post?,” and “What can I do to get my post reinstated when
you make a mistake?”
Regulation could help answer those questions by ensuring that internet content
moderation systems are consultative, transparent, and subject to meaningful
independent oversight. Specifically, procedural accountability regulations could
include, at a minimum, requirements that companies publish their content
standards, provide avenues for people to report to the company any content
that appears to violate the standards, respond to such user reports with a
decision, and provide notice to users when removing their content from the site.
Such regulations could require a certain level of performance in these areas to
receive certifications or to avoid regulatory consequences.
Regulation could also incentivize—or where appropriate, require—additional
measures such as:
Insight into a company’s development of its content standards.
A requirement to consult with stakeholders when making significant
changes to standards.
An avenue for users to provide their own input on content standards.
A channel for users to appeal the company’s removal (or non-removal)
decision on a specific piece of content to some higher authority within
the company or some source of authority outside the company.
Public reporting on policy enforcement (possibly including how much
content was removed from the site and for what reasons, how much content
was identified by the company through its own proactive means before
users reported it, how often the content appears on its site, etc.).
Regulations of this sort should take into account a company’s size and reach,
as content regulation should not serve as a barrier to entry for new competitors
in the market.
Question 2: How should regulation enhance the
accountability of internet platforms to the public?
11. 11
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
An important benefit of this regulatory approach is that it incentivizes an
appropriate balancing of competing interests, such as freedom of expression, safety,
and privacy. Required transparency measures ensure that the companies’ balancing
efforts are laid bare for the public and governments to see.
If they pursued this approach, regulators would not be starting from scratch; they
would be expanding and adding regulatory effect to previous efforts of governments,
civil society, and industry. For example, the Global Network Initiative Principles4
and other civil society efforts have helped create baselines for due process and
transparency linked to human rights principles. The GNI has also created an
incentives structure for compliance. Similarly, the European Union Code of Conduct
on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online has created a framework that has led to
all eight signatory companies meeting specific requirements for transparency and
due process.
In adopting this approach, however, regulators must be cautious. Specific product
design mandates—“put this button here,” “use this wording,” etc.—will make it harder
for internet companies to test what options work best for users. It will also make
it harder for companies to tailor the reporting experience to the device being used:
the best way to report content while using a mobile phone is likely to differ from
the best way to report content while using a laptop. In fact, we have found that
certain requests from regulators to structure our reporting mechanisms in specific
ways have actually reduced the likelihood that people will report dangerous
content to us quickly.
Another key component of procedural accountability regulation is transparency.
Transparency, such as required public reporting of enforcement efforts, would
certainly subject internet companies to more public scrutiny, as their work would be
available for governments and the public to grade. This scrutiny could have both
positive and negative effects.
The potential negative effects could arise from the way transparency requirements
shape company incentives. If a company feared that people would judge harshly of
its efforts and would therefore stop using or advertising on its service, the company
might be tempted to sacrifice in unmeasured areas to help boost performance in
measured areas. For instance, if regulation required the measuring and public
annual reporting of the average time a company took to respond to user reports of
violating content, a company might sacrifice quality in its review of user reports in
order to post better numbers. If regulation required public reporting of how many
times users appealed content removal decisions, a company might make its appeal
channel difficult to find or use.
On the other hand, companies taking a long-term view of their business incentives
will likely find that public reactions to their transparency efforts—even if painful
at times—can lead them to invest in ways that will improve public and government
12. 12
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
confidence in the longer term. For example, spurred by multi-stakeholder initiatives
like GNI or the EU Code of Conduct mentioned above, Facebook has increased
efforts to build accountability into our content moderation process by focusing on
consultation, transparency, and oversight. In response to reactions to our reports,
we have sought additional input from experts and organizations.
Going forward, we will continue to work with governments, academics, and civil
society to consider what more meaningful accountability could look like in this
space. As companies get better at providing this kind of transparency, people and
governments will have more confidence that companies are improving their
performance, and people will be empowered to make choices about which platform
to use—choices that will ultimately determine which services will be successful.
13. 13
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Question 3: Should regulation require internet
companies to meet certain performance targets?
Governments could also approach accountability by requiring that companies meet
specific targets regarding their content moderation systems. Such an approach
would hold companies accountable for the ends they have achieved rather than
ensuring the validity of how they got there.
For example, regulators could say that internet platforms must publish annual data
on the “prevalence” of content that violates their policies, and that companies must
make reasonable efforts to ensure that the prevalence of violating content remains
below some standard threshold. If prevalence rises above this threshold, then the
company might be subject to greater oversight, specific improvement plans, or—in
the case of repeated systematic failures—fines.
Regulators pursuing this approach will need to decide which metrics to prioritize.
That choice will determine the incentives for internet companies in how they
moderate content. The potential for perverse incentives under this model is greater
than under the procedural accountability model, because companies with
unsatisfactory performance reports could face direct penalties in the form of fines
or other legal consequences, and will therefore have a greater incentive to shortcut
unmeasured areas where doing so could boost performance in measured areas.
Governments considering this approach may also want to consider whether and
how to establish common definitions—or encourage companies to do so—to be able
to compare progress across companies and ensure companies do not tailor their
definitions in such a way to game the metrics.
With that in mind, perhaps the most promising area for exploring the development
of performance targets would be the prevalence of violating content (how much
violating content is actually viewed on a site) and the time-to-action (how long the
content exists on the site before removal or other intervention by the platform).
Prevalence: Generally speaking, some kinds of content are harmful only to
the extent they are ever actually seen by people. A regulator would likely
care more about stopping one incendiary hateful post that would be seen by
millions of people than twenty hateful posts that are seen only by the person
who posted them. For this reason, regulators (and platforms) will likely be
best served by a focus on reducing the prevalence of views of harmful
content. Regulators might consider, however, the incentives they might be
inadvertently creating for companies to more narrowly define harmful
content or to take a minimalist approach in prevalence studies.
Time-to-Action: By contrast, some types of content could be harmful even
without an audience. In the case of real-time streaming of child sexual
14. 14
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
exploitation, coordination of a violent attack, or an expressed plan to harm
oneself, quick action is often necessary to save lives, and the weighing of
values may be so different as to justify an approach that incentivizes fast
decision-making even where it may lead to more incorrect content removals
(thus infringing on legitimate expression) or more aggressive detection
regimes (such as in the case of using artificial intelligence to detect threats
of self harm, thus potentially affecting privacy interests).
There are significant trade-offs regulators must consider when identifying metrics
and thresholds. For example, a requirement that companies “remove all hate speech
within 24 hours of receiving a report from a user or government” may incentivize
platforms to cease any proactive searches for such content, and to instead use
those resources to more quickly review user and government reports on a first-
in-first-out basis. In terms of preventing harm, this shift would have serious costs.
The biggest internet companies have developed technology that allows them to
detect certain types of content violations with much greater speed and accuracy
than human reporting. For instance, from July through September 2019, the vast
majority of content Facebook removed for violating its hate speech, self-harm,
child exploitation, graphic violence, and terrorism policies was detected by the
company’s technology before anyone reported it. A regulatory focus on response
to user or government reports must take into account the cost it would pose to
these company-led detection efforts.
Even setting aside proactive detection, a model that focuses on average time-to-
action of reported content would discourage companies from focusing on removal
of the most harmful content. Companies may be able to predict the harmfulness of
posts by assessing the likely reach of content (through distribution trends and likely
virality), assessing the likelihood that a reported post violates (through review with
artificial intelligence), or assessing the likely severity of reported content (such as if
the content was reported by a safety organization with a proven record of reporting
only serious violations). Put differently, companies focused on average speed of
assessment would end up prioritizing review of posts unlikely to violate or unlikely
to reach many viewers, simply because those posts are closer to the 24-hour
deadline, even while other posts are going viral and reaching millions.
A regulation requiring companies to “remove all hate speech within 24 hours
of upload” would create still more perverse incentives. Companies would have a
strong incentive to turn a blind eye to content that is older than 24 hours (and
unlikely to be seen by a government), even though that content could be causing
harm. Companies would be disincentivized from developing technology that can
identify violating private content on the site, and from conducting prevalence
studies of the existing content on their site.
The potential costs of this sort of regulation can be illustrated through a review of
Facebook’s improvements in countering terror propaganda. When Facebook first
15. 15
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
began measuring its average time to remove terror propaganda, it had technical
means to automatically identify some terror propaganda at the time of upload.
After considerable time and effort, Facebook engineers developed better detection
tools, including a means for identifying propaganda that had been on the site for
years. Facebook used this tool to find and remove propaganda, some of which had
long existed on the site without having been reported by users or governments.
This effort meant that Facebook’s measurement of average time on site for terror
propaganda removed went up considerably. If Facebook would have faced
consequences for an increase in its “time-to-action,” it would have been
discouraged from ever creating such a tool.
Whichever metrics regulators decide to pursue, they would be well served
to first identify the values that are at stake (such as safety, freedom of
expression, and privacy) and the practices they wish to incentivize, and then
structure their regulations in a way that minimizes the risk of perverse
incentives. This would require close coordination among various regulators
and policymaking bodies focused on sometimes competing interests, such as
privacy, law enforcement, consumer protection, and child safety. A regulation
that serves the regulatory interests of one body well may in fact harm the
interests of another.
16. 16
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Many governments already have in place laws and systems to define illegal speech
and notify internet platforms when illegal speech is present on their services.
Governments are also considering whether to develop regulations that specifically
define the “harmful content” internet platforms should remove—above and beyond
speech that is already illegal.
International human rights instruments provide the best starting point for analysis
of government efforts to restrict speech. Article 19 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)5
holds:
1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall
include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of
all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the
form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries
with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject
to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law
and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order
(ordre public), or of public health or morals.
Similarly, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights carves out room
for governments to pass speech laws that are necessary for:
…[T]he interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety,
for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals,
for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing
the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining
the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.6
In countries with strong democratic institutions, laws governing speech are passed
as part of a transparent process that weighs different societal interests, with
due respect for human rights and with the check of an impartial judiciary. Drawing
a clear line between legal and illegal speech helps citizens to know what is and
is not permissible. Judicial checks and balances help to reduce the likelihood of
capricious restrictions on legitimate speech.
Question 4: Should regulation define which “harmful
content” should be prohibited on internet platforms?
17. 17
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Despite these international human rights norms, laws affecting speech and
even criminalizing it vary widely both by jurisdiction and by the type of harm
contemplated, even among liberal democratic nations.
Among types of content most likely to be outlawed, such as content supporting
terrorism and content related to the sexual exploitation of children, there is
significant variance in laws and enforcement. In some jurisdictions, for instance,
images of child sexual exploitation are lawful if they are computer generated. In
others, praise of terror groups is permitted, and lists of proscribed terror groups
vary widely by country and region. Laws vary even more in areas such as hate
speech, harassment, or misinformation. Many governments are grappling with how
to approach the spread of misinformation, but few have outlawed it. As the UN
and others have noted, the general criminalization of sharing misinformation would
be “incompatible with international standards for restrictions on freedom of
expression.”7
Thresholds also vary for defamatory speech and offensive material.
The variation among laws is significant because it underscores the difficulty of
weighing competing values like safety and expression. If governments do not agree
on how to balance these interests when writing laws, it is likely they will have very
different ideas of how to define online content standards, which require even more
specificity than laws in order to ensure consistent application.
Laws restricting speech are generally implemented by law enforcement officials
and the courts. Fact finders investigate and due process is afforded to the speaker.
The penalty for illegal speech can include fines or imprisonment.
Internet content moderation is fundamentally different. Companies use a
combination of technical systems and employees and often have only the text in
a post to guide their assessment. The assessment must be made quickly, as people
expect violations to be removed within hours or days rather than the months
that a judicial process might take. The penalty is generally removal of the post
or the person’s account.
Given these complexities, governments that seek to define for internet companies
what content they should allow on their platforms should seek to:
Create a standard that can be enforced practically, at scale, with limited
context about the speaker and content, without undermining the goal of
promoting expression.
Take account of different user preferences and expectations for different
sorts of internet services. Different definitions may be appropriate based
on the nature of the service (search engines versus social media) or the
nature of the audience (private chat versus public post, ephemeral versus
more permanent, etc).
18. 18
02 | Four Key Questions
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
Take account of individual controls, preferences, settings, etc. that a
company may provide its users for some kinds of potentially harmful content
(e.g., nudity).
Provide flexibility so that platforms can adapt policies to emerging language
trends and adversarial efforts to avoid enforcement. For instance, hateful
speech, bullying, and threats of self-harm are often expressed through
a lexicon of words that fall in and out of favor or evolve over time. Similarly,
proscribed terror groups and hate groups may rename themselves or
fracture into different groups.
19. 19
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
In some countries, a regulatory system for online content may require a new type
of regulator. Addressing online communication goes beyond simply adopting the
core capabilities of traditional regulators and channeling them towards the task
of effective oversight. Instead, any regulator in this space will need proficiency in
data, operations, and online content. Governments will also need to ensure that
regulatory authorities pay due regard to innovation and protect users’ rights online,
including consideration of the following:
I N C E N T I V E S
Ensuring accountability in companies’ content moderation systems
and procedures will be the best way to create the incentives for
companies to responsibly balance values like safety, privacy, and
freedom of expression.
T H E G L O B A L N AT U R E O F T H E I N T E R N E T
Any national regulatory approach to addressing harmful content should
respect the global scale of the internet and the value of cross-border
communications. It should aim to increase interoperability among regulators
and regulations. However, governments should not impose their standards
onto other countries’ citizens through the courts or any other means.
03
Principles for
Future Regulators
20. 20
03 | Principles for Future Regulators
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
F R E E D O M O F E X P R E S S I O N
In addition to complying with Article 19 of the ICCPR (and related
guidance), regulators should consider the impacts of their decisions
on freedom of expression.
T E C H N O L O G Y
Regulators should develop an understanding of the capabilities and
limitations of technology in content moderation and allow internet
companies the flexibility to innovate. An approach that works for one
particular platform or type of content may be less effective (or even
counterproductive) when applied elsewhere.
P R O P O R T I O N A L I T Y A N D N E C E S S I T Y
Regulators should take into account the severity and prevalence of
the harmful content in question, its status in law, and the efforts already
underway to address the content.
21. 21
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
We hope that this paper contributes to the ongoing conversations among
policymakers and other stakeholders. These are challenging issues and sustainable
solutions will require collaboration. As we learn more from interacting with experts
and refining our approach to content moderation, our thinking about the best ways
to regulate will continue to evolve. We welcome feedback on the issues discussed
in this paper.
04
The Beginning
of a Conversation
22. 22
C H A R T I N G A W A Y F O R W A R D
E N D N O T E S
Online Content Regulation
1. Zuckerberg, Mark. “The Internet Needs New Rules. Let’s Start in
These Four Areas.” Washington Post, 30 March 2019.
2. Bowers, John, and Jonathan Zittrain. “Answering Impossible
Questions: Content Governance in an Age of Disinformation.”
Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 2020.
3. As quoted in: Reynolds, Matt. “The Strange Story of Section 230,
the Obscure Law That Created Our Flawed, Broken Internet.” Wired,
28 March 2019, www.wired.co.uk/article/
section-230-communications-decency-act.
4. “The GNI Principles.” Global Network Initiative, 10 January 2020.
https://globalnetworkinitiative.org/gni-principles/.
5. UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171.
6. Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos.
11 and 14, 4 November 1950.
7. “Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and ‘Fake News’,
Disinformation and Propaganda.” The United Nations (UN) Special
Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Representative
on Freedom of the Media, the Organization of American States (OAS)
Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) Special
Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information,
3 March 2015. As noted in the Joint Declaration and explored infra,
those International Standards are: “that they be provided for by law,
serve one of the legitimate interests recognised under international
law, and be necessary and proportionate to protect that interest.”