While the policy position highlights the common role of regulators in making the internet safer, there remain challenging legal and cultural differences in defining harm online
Network of online safety regulators offers its vision for a more unified regulation of the internet
On 24 May 2024, the Global Online Safety Regulators Network published its position statement on how regulatory approaches to online safety can be more coherent and coordinated. The Network was launched in 2022 and is currently chaired by Ofcom in the UK. In addition to its primary membership of eight global regulators, including Ireland’s Coimisiún na Meán and Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, the body also invites observer organisations such as civil society groups and government departments to participate in its work. This policy paper is the second issued by the Network, following its September 2023 publication on the protection of human rights in the content of online safety regulation.
The statement identifies cooperation as an opportunity to more effectively influence the powerful tech industry
Within its position, the Network restates now common concerns about online safety, noting that online harms do not respect national borders and diverging regulatory regimes have the potential to drive fragmentation online or create a so-called “splinternet”. However, the Network also identifies the work of unifying their regulatory efforts as an opportunity to make online spaces safer globally, while supporting smaller or lesser-resourced regulators to more efficiently implement laws and effectively influence a powerful, well-financed tech industry. Though the statement does acknowledge the differences between emerging online safety frameworks, the paper also identifies a number of common functions among all member regulators, which could be grounds for better cooperation, including:
Partnering with law enforcement and hotline networks;
Issuing non-compliance notices and financial penalties;
Seeking court orders and injunctions;
Engaging in education and awareness raising programmes; and
Engaging with industry stakeholders.
The Network outlines its plans to continue to grow its observer programme to include globally representative members from different fields, as well as its work to develop internal working groups in order to better foster collaboration among member regulators.
Differences in online safety laws complicate matters, but there is scope for the Network to have an impact
Though the Network stresses the similarities among the legal frameworks they implement and enforce, its policy paper also reflects some key differences in the powers and duties of its member regulators. As perhaps the most fundamental difference, two jurisdictions – Fiji and South Africa – do not produce guidance or codes of practice for regulated platforms detailing compliant conduct. Instead, the enforcement work of the Fijian Online Safety Commission and the South African Film and Publication Board (FSB) is based on identifying offending content as proof of non-compliance. Additionally, and unlike most other regulators, the FSB as well as the Korea Communications Standards Commission are charged with conducting proactive content scanning to identify specific instances of harmful content – a practice that was criticised in a number of other jurisdictions as overreaching government surveillance. These differences in laws, along with more philosophical differences in defining harmful content in a given cultural context, will likely complicate the effort to simplify global compliance. Nevertheless, the work of the Network could still be impactful in improving the understanding of, and joint action on, common interests, such as limiting the proliferation of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or developing greater technical expertise on the workings of content recommendation algorithms.
