Dave Farber
2018-08-02 21:06:09 UTC
Date: August 3, 2018 at 5:34:14 AM GMT+9
Subject: If Silicon Valley won't stop fake news, we will
Here is a follow-up opinion piece in the Guardian from the Chairman of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport SelectCommittee of the House of Common, whose excellent report you sent out to IP from me a couple of days ago. You might also want this for IP.
Cheers
Brian
âââ
â
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html
-------------------------------------------Subject: If Silicon Valley won't stop fake news, we will
Here is a follow-up opinion piece in the Guardian from the Chairman of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport SelectCommittee of the House of Common, whose excellent report you sent out to IP from me a couple of days ago. You might also want this for IP.
Cheers
Brian
âââ
If Silicon Valley won't stop fake news, we will
Damian Collins
Around the world, peopleâs data is being gathered and used in order to micro-target them with a relentless stream of promoted content. Governments and elected representatives are sitting up and taking notice. Is that âanti-techâ? That would be a bit like saying that governments are âanti-carâ for requiring people to wear seatbelts.
The mounting evidence of how easily user data can be scraped from social media sites, and then the lack of oversight of what happens to it, is rightly a cause for concern. When we hear that the Russians have been using Facebook custom audience tools to target adverts that have illegally sought to interfere in the elections of other countries, we have to take notice, particularly when the company itself initially failed to spot it.
We live in a world where people increasingly see social media not just as a gateway to the internet, but as a main source of news. Thatâs why we have to look at the threat that campaigns of disinformation, which spread through websites like Facebook and Twitter, pose to our democracy.
The recommendations made in the recent report of the House of Commons digital, culture, media and sport select committee, which has considered all of these issues, create a new framework for establishing requirements of greater responsibility from tech companies.
The inevitable tension that policy ideas like these create was described by the former director of BBC News, James Harding, in his Hugh Cudlipp lecture in March, as part of a battle between Silicon Valley (representing the tech industries) and Capitol Hill (representing the politicians). What we are suggesting from the perspective of the UK, is that if the Valley wonât come to the Hill, the Hill is going to have to come to the Valley.
We believe that by creating new legal liabilities for social media companies to act against known sources of harmful and misleading content, it is more likely that they will do so. When content breaches the community guidelines of social media sites, it should be taken down â but often itâs not, even when referred back to the company by users.
We also believe that more could be achieved through artificial intelligence to proactively identify harmful content. It would not be right for tech companies to be asked to become the arbiters of political opinion expressed on social media â that would clearly be an infringement of free speech. However, they should make sure that people who receive targeted political messages understand who is sending it to them, and which country they are based in. I am pleased to see that this is one area where Facebook in particular is making progress.
<snip>
Full story at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/01/big-tech-control-politics-fake-news-data-facebook-ads-electionsDamian Collins
Around the world, peopleâs data is being gathered and used in order to micro-target them with a relentless stream of promoted content. Governments and elected representatives are sitting up and taking notice. Is that âanti-techâ? That would be a bit like saying that governments are âanti-carâ for requiring people to wear seatbelts.
The mounting evidence of how easily user data can be scraped from social media sites, and then the lack of oversight of what happens to it, is rightly a cause for concern. When we hear that the Russians have been using Facebook custom audience tools to target adverts that have illegally sought to interfere in the elections of other countries, we have to take notice, particularly when the company itself initially failed to spot it.
We live in a world where people increasingly see social media not just as a gateway to the internet, but as a main source of news. Thatâs why we have to look at the threat that campaigns of disinformation, which spread through websites like Facebook and Twitter, pose to our democracy.
The recommendations made in the recent report of the House of Commons digital, culture, media and sport select committee, which has considered all of these issues, create a new framework for establishing requirements of greater responsibility from tech companies.
The inevitable tension that policy ideas like these create was described by the former director of BBC News, James Harding, in his Hugh Cudlipp lecture in March, as part of a battle between Silicon Valley (representing the tech industries) and Capitol Hill (representing the politicians). What we are suggesting from the perspective of the UK, is that if the Valley wonât come to the Hill, the Hill is going to have to come to the Valley.
We believe that by creating new legal liabilities for social media companies to act against known sources of harmful and misleading content, it is more likely that they will do so. When content breaches the community guidelines of social media sites, it should be taken down â but often itâs not, even when referred back to the company by users.
We also believe that more could be achieved through artificial intelligence to proactively identify harmful content. It would not be right for tech companies to be asked to become the arbiters of political opinion expressed on social media â that would clearly be an infringement of free speech. However, they should make sure that people who receive targeted political messages understand who is sending it to them, and which country they are based in. I am pleased to see that this is one area where Facebook in particular is making progress.
<snip>
â
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=26461375
Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=26461375&id_secret=26461375-c2b8a462&post_id=20180802170623:E7B0A2CA-9697-11E8-920B-970FDDFCE44A
Powered by Listbox: https://www.listbox.com