Topics / Technology and speech
Should social media platforms be required to remove harmful but legal content?
Should UK law require social media platforms to remove or restrict content that is lawful but considered harmful, and if so, for all users or only for children? The question weighs protection from online harm against freedom of expression, privacy, and the proper roles of government, regulators, platforms and families.
Positions
- Yes: Platforms design and profit from systems that spread content at scale, so they should be legally required to remove or restrict clearly defined categories of lawful but harmful content, such as material promoting suicide, self-harm or eating disorders and targeted abuse, for all users and not only children.
- Only for children: Platforms should be required to protect children from lawful but harmful content, such as material promoting suicide, self-harm or eating disorders and pornography, while adults should decide for themselves what lawful content they see, supported by tools they control.
- No: Platforms should not be legally required to remove lawful content. If speech is harmful enough to suppress, Parliament should make it illegal through clear law; otherwise compelled removal gives government and platforms power over lawful expression that tends to be over-used and abused.