In an attempt to respond to growing concerns about hate and awful activity online, the Online Safety Bill imposes duties of care—binding legal obligations for online services—that require online services to mitigate Internet harms such as hate speech, child predation, minor access to online pornography, self-harm encouragement, and more. While these policies are well intentioned and target credible harm and severe content online, the Online Safety Bill’s loose definition of what constitutes “legal but harmful” content, overbroad scope, and general legislative overreach encroach on the civil liberties of all users—not just those in the United Kingdom. Specifically, the legislation undermines legal free expression, privacy, and anonymity. This report critically analyzes these challenges and provides alternative solutions that would minimize the Online Safety Bill’s negative impact on important civil liberties and better balance its intended goals.
Reforming the UK Online Safety Bill to Protect Legal Free Expression and Anonymity
by Kir Nuthi & Mella Tesfazgi
written by Kir Nuthi & Mella Tesfazgi
6.5K
Kir Nuthi
Kir Nuthi was a senior policy analyst at the Center for Data Innovation focusing on European digital policy. Previously, she worked as a public affairs manager at NetChoice, where she focused on emerging technology issues surrounding content moderation, competition policy, and the sharing economy. Kir holds an MSc in International Public Policy from University College London and a BA with dual focuses in Economics and Political Science from the University of California San Diego.
Mella Tesfazgi
Mella Tesfazgi is a Policy Fellow at the Center for Data Innovation. She is a second-year Master’s in Public Policy candidate at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and holds a B.A in Economics from Wake Forest University.
previous post
