Thread by @OnlineSafetyCom

.@Imi_Ahmed tells the #OnlineSafetyBill Committee that @CCDHate have identified 'the Disinformation Dozen', responsible for almost 2/3rds of anti-vaccine content circulating on social media platforms. He says he is concerned that disinformation is not named as a harm in the Bill

.@Imi_Ahmed says that if platforms were transparent about how they enforce their own rules, about their algorithms, and their business models, solutions to online harms would become clear. Independent inspection is needed

@MrJohnNicolson asks: What are the motivations of anti-vaxxers? @Imi_Ahmed says this is like any other conspiracy theory: making people distrust authorities. @CCDHate research says anti-vaxx networks reach 60 million online users

@MrJohnNicolson brings up the @CommonsDCMS evidence session with @tiktok_uk where he asked why an anti-vaxxer had over 600k followers thesun.co.uk/news/13507426/…

Big Tech spent 120m on lobbying in the US during the election year, says @Imi_Ahmed, who recommends that Members of the @OnlineSafetyCom ask everyone who submits evidence: Do you take money from Big Tech? 💸

.@dean4watford asks if the language of anti-vaxxers is convincing people who didn't believe before. @Imi_Ahmed says yes, because they adapt their messages online, like propagandists

.@dean4watford asks if vulnerable people are being specifically targeted. @Imi_Ahmed says it isn't about being smart or not - some propaganda just sticks! 🥕 smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/a…

.@Imi_Ahmed tells Lord Black that unless @Ofcom has the power to independently audit social media companies, it will be ignored. @Imi_Ahmed doesn't believe the #OnlineSafetyBill allows for that in its current form.

That said, @Imi_Ahmed also says the #OnlineSafetyBill is the most ambitious piece of legislation in the world to regulate the internet - the rest of the world is watching the UK.

.@Imi_Ahmed says that he will submit to @OnlineSafetyCom evidence of threats to @CCDHate from the Disinformation Dozen counterhate.com/disinformation…

.@darrenpjones asks what proportion of disinfo found by @CCDHate is paid-for ads. @Imi_Ahmed says it is considerable - paid for ads should be in scope of the #OnlineSafetyBill

.@rioferdy5 @SanjayKickItOut @edzj_13 have joined us for evidence.

@DamianCollins starts asks by asking @rioferdy5 whether he is disappointed that racist abuse is something that still affects players today despite progress made.

@rioferdy5 says its disheartening. He responds that the one of the first things he thought when the three black England football players missed penalty kicks during the Euro finals was "let's see what happens on social media"

.@edzj_13: Online Abuse is a golden goose for social media organisations - they are not tackling the problem we're seeing. Its not just football players and their families- it's coaches, refs, everyone involved in the game. And it's not just in football.

.@SanjayKickItOut Often when we have these conversations raising these issues in London with tech companies but then 'California says no.'

.@rioferdy5 'This kind of online activity normalises racist behaviour. It normalises the type of language. And there's no repercussions for what that person put online. I don't know what other industries in the world its possible to use such language and hide behind the curtain.'

.@rioferdy5 'It does hurt. I've seen members of my family disintegrate, I've seen family members of other players take it worse than them. It's down to the victim to report it and that's not right.'

.In response to Lord Stevenson, @SanjayKickItOut says that like the @TheFCA has for the financial sector, @Ofcom needs investigatory powers. Poachers turning gamekeepers, ie from social media companies to the regulator, will be helpful

.@rioferdy5 speaks about the importance of education, and @edzj_13 adds that education needs to be accompanied by algorithmic regulation, otherwise you're just putting a band-aid over a bullet wound

.@Q66Suzi raises the huge amount of online abuse politicians receive, and asks if the duty of care as currently defined in the #OnlineSafetyBill is enough to tackle this. @edzj_13 says it's important that 'legal but harmful' content is in scope, & defined by @UKParliament

.@rioferdy5 tells @darrenpjones that it is key to address the problem of anonymity as well as content in the #OnlineSafetyBill. He questions whether platforms desire to tackle online hate efficiently and quickly - their actions have proved otherwise. He urges @UKParliament to act

.@edzj_13 @FA adds that one of @Ofcom's Codes of Practice should be on the reach that anonymous accounts are allowed to have. @DamianCollins asks if this means the Bill needs to explicitly prescribe this - @edzj_13 says yes

Baroness Kidron asks what the impact of online abuse has been specifically on young women players. @edzj_13 says that in one case, a player reported abuse, and was then been blocked - social media is protecting the offenders rather than the victims.

Baroness Kidron asks what promises @10DowningStreet made to football. @edzj_13 replies that the #OnlineSafetyBill would solve all issues online abuse; but the Bill, at the moment, only solves some of them

.@MrJohnNicolson asks what lessons can we learn from the past on how to solve the issue of racism on social media. @rioferdy5 says anonymity has changed everything - it empowers abusers and protects them from any repercussions.

.@SanjayKickItOut adds that we have anecdotes rather than hard data on online abuse from platforms - @Ofcom needs mandatory powers to get that data. @edzj_13 says social media companies cannot get to 'mark their own homework, or game the statistics'

@SanjayKickItOut tells Lord Gilbert that the importance of including ‘legal but harmful’ in @Ofcom’s scope is illustrated by the abuse at the end of the #euro2020final - we need a flexible regulator who can adapt within the framework defined by @UKParliament

We’re now joined by @DannyStone1 @antisempolicy and @Nancy_M_K @stonewall. In answer to Lord Knight, both call for more research on online abuse towards minorities, including in private messaging services

.@DannyStone1 highlights that the journalistic and democratic carve-outs need to be more clearly defined in order to prevent abuse. @Nancy_M_K agrees, saying that legitimate debates on LGBTQI issues cannot be an excuse for a free-for-all online

.@Nancy_M_K @stonewalluk, in answer to @dean4watford, says we cannot confuse the views of wider society and views expressed online, however we should worry about online hate spilling ‘offline’, with more and more attacks on gay men in UK cities

.@dean4watford asks if the #OnlineSafetyBill does enough to tackle the problem of anonymous abuse. @DannyStone1 @antisempolicy says no, at the moment it doesn’t - we need a ‘Know Your Customer’ principle like in financial services

.@Nancy_M_K cautions that anonymity remains important for LGBTQI people in the UK and around the world, identity verification could endanger them and prevent them from engaging online 🏳️‍🌈

.@MrJohnNicolson says he was sent a homophobic insult online - @Twitter said it didn’t breach their standards. ‘They know I’m an MP. Imagine the disdain they give to the average LGBTQI person’

.@DannyStone1 says search should be included in Category 1 services in the #OnlineSafetyBill, citing antisemitic content that search engines like @bing show users as top results

Baroness Kidron asks whether we need minimum content standards in the #OnlineSafetyBill or if we can leave individual platforms to set their terms & conditions. @DannyStone1 says standards are needed from @UKParliament: we need to look at systems rather than individual takedowns

Last question from Chair @DamianCollins : is it possible for a system where a court order can ask for information on an account, that still protects users’ privacy interests. @Nancy_M_K says yes but the devil is in the detail.

Our evidence session today has now ended. You can read the full @BBCNews coverage here: bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-p…