The New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs | Te Tari Taiwhenua released its Safer Online Services and Media Platforms proposed approach to regulating online services and media platforms. Feedback on this proposal was open until 31 July and the Online Safety Exchange took the opportunity to provide a submission. In this blog, we summarise our analysis and recommendations to further develop and expand the online safety ecosystem.
The Safer Online Services proposal
The Safer Online Services and Media Platforms proposal was released in June 2023 as a possible response to concerns about rising online harms, outdated legislation, and an inconsistent approach to dealing with harmful content.
It outlines a new way to regulate social media and traditional media platforms at a systems level in Aotearoa New Zealand through a series of codes enforced by a new industry regulator.
The fall of regulation
At the heart of the proposal is a view that more New Zealanders are being exposed to more harm because the rapidly evolving digital environment has made OUR existing regulatory systems ineffective.
We see this as partly true as there are aspects of the digital ecosystem that resist any attempted enforcement of regulation. As a result, regulation is not as effective a tool for ensuring safety in digital environments as it has been with other safety challenges – and Governments should look to the OSX Unify framework to reduce their reliance on regulation.
The rise of Codes of Practice
A number of jurisdictions have embraced enforceable codes of practice as a flexible regulatory tool. However, the New Zealand codes will only be applied to “larger or riskier” platforms which makes it likely that the worst sites and platforms will simply ignore them.
We strongly support the use of codes of practice to improve the quality of information flow from tech companies. Codes of practice enable the wider online safety ecosystem to design and develop more targeted and effective interventions.
We can see codes setting minimum standards, but we also agree with the findings of the Atlantic Council that they can drive a compliance mindset at the expense of a safety innovation mindset. We don’t see codes as being a highly effective tool for addressing the more vexing challenges within online safety.
Awful but lawful
The proposal outlines community concerns around problematic content noting that platform standards do not always reflect the expectations of our society. The new regulator is therefore set to use codes to systemically address the treatment of awful but lawful content.
Individual pieces of awful but lawful content seldom make a substantive contribution to our democracy – but a more general protection for freedom of expression does. For this reason, harm from this content is most effectively resolved at an operational level on a case-by-case basis and not at a system level (systemically).
The Freedom of Expression question
Enforceable codes of practice could potentially create a regulatory environment that makes a “delete by default” approach to some (legal) content the most economical option for platforms – which has a detrimental impact of freedom of expression.
This proposal specifically states that it will use codes to address the treatment of content that does not meet “Government consumer safety expectations” and match “our context”. This does give rise to reasonable concerns about how freedom of expression is to be ensured.
The New Zealand way
Historically, New Zealand has had a relatively uncomplicated online safety and law enforcement ecosystem and it has been able to make the most of that. Despite having limited resources and relying on aging legislation, our online safety efforts were highly regarded through the first 20 years of the 21st century. Our view is that those operational agencies that built a reputation for innovation, pragmatism, and collaboration should be empowered to continue to do so.
It is recognised that other countries are investing in new regulatory measures. However, we don’t recommend copying those efforts before we analyse what difference they have made – or know what design or environmental factors makes one more effective than another.
An alternative: The reset
As an online safety organisation founded in New Zealand with international partners, we do not believe the proposed approach to Safer Online Services represents the best next steps for New Zealand, nor does it reflect the strengths and experience of the country’s online safety ecosystem.
We do think it is a good time for the government to seek feedback. Our preference would be to see the Government undertake an ecosystem reset. This would require some operational organisations to be revamped and some legislation to be developed – but the outcome would be a more energised ecosystem of effective agencies working together to make people safe online.
Read the full OSX submission here.
[…] Online Safety Exchange provided a submission in July 2023. In it we suggested that the best way to advance the online safety experience for New Zealanders was to strengthen and grow […]