Thread by @joannaccherry

🧵 Very disappointed not to get called to speak in the #OnlineSafetyBill debate this evening particularly as unsubstantiated allegations of transphobia were being bandied about. Here’s what I was planning to say

There is much to welcome in the Bill particularly in relation to tackling Child Sexual and Emotional Abuse online. As a former Specialist Sex Crimes prosecutor I am all too aware of how children are targeted online.

Sadly there are those in our society, often hiding in plain sight, who seek to exploit children and so child safeguarding should be a number one priority for any government. In so far as this bill seeks to do that I applaud it.

However, I believe that there is a very significant danger that the Bill, as drafted, will lead to censorship of legal speech by online platforms. In this respect the bill requires significant amendment.

In relation to ‘legal but harmful’ content, experience shows that vexatious complainants will exploit any lack of definitional clarity to claim that lawful speech on topics of public concern is ‘harmful’ and shd be subject to censorship.

Experience also shows that online platforms cannot be trusted to police legal speech in a way that is properly cognisant of the law not just on freedom of speech but also on freedom of belief and domestic anti-discrimination law.

For example @Twitter’s hateful conduct policy does not include the protected characteristic of sex. Twitter routinely censors perfectly legitimate contributions to the public debate on women’s sex based rights while routinely ignoring threats of violence

& worse to women participating in this debate. In October 2019 the @HumanRightsCtte published a report on democracy, freedom of expression & freedom of association noting that Twitter omits sex from the protected characteristics in its hateful conduct policy.

We recommended that they should remedy this. In May 2019 a Twitter executive promised us that she would look at this issue. Nearly 3 years later nothing has been done.

When women have challenged twitter’s unfair and discriminatory moderation policies Twitter have replied that they do not consider themselves bound by the Equality Act in relation to the services they provide in the UK.

Their argument is that because they are a company established in Ireland as opposed to the UK they are therefore exempt under paragraph 2 of Schedule 25 to the Equality Act. If that is correct, then it’s time to close that loophole.

Clause 3 of the online safety bill brings twitter within the regulatory scheme of the Bill as a service with a significant number of UK users, so I believe an amendment to the Equality Act to do likewise would be within the scope of the bill.

Furthermore, in order to make sure that twitter & other online platforms obey U.K. non-discrimination law we should also amend Clause 36 & 65 regarding Ofcom’s production of Codes of Practice and Guidance re transparency reports to ensure that Ofcom

consults experts on the Equality Act such as the @EHRC before producing the same.  This would fit well with the existing reference to Equality issues as well as human rights in Clauses 36 and 65.

Although I didn’t get to speak tonight I’ve reason to believe the government will look favourably at my suggestions to ensure online platforms like @Twitter don’t discriminate against women, lesbians & the gender critical when moderating online content. ENDS