'Chilling effect' of US policy, safety stack investment and Ellis urges reform
Hello and welcome to Everything in Moderation's Week in Review, your need-to-know news and analysis about platform policy, content moderation and internet regulation. It's written by me, Ben Whitelaw and supported by paid members like you.
I’m writing this from the south of France in the dying embers of my paternity leave, where I may have found the perfect metaphor for how T&S professionals feel in the face of the growing threat of AI-mediated harms. (NB: I was reassured that neither animal or human was harmed during the event).
A big welcome to free subscribers over the last two weeks; folks from Fieldfisher, TenTens Tech, Kroll, Reddit, Overtone.ai, Future Privacy Forum, Meta and a bunch of folks from Automattic.
Whether you're new or otherwise, chances are that you'll want to check out Alice Hunsberger's guide to tracking the right T&S metrics and tune in to Mike talking with his good friend and First Amendment lawyer, Ari Cohn, on the latest episode of Ctrl-Alt-Speech.
An even bigger celebration goes to a handful of newly-paid up EiM members, who, for the princely sum of $100 a year, have supported independent coverage of the T&S industry at a time when it's most needed and got themselves unfettered access to EiM's archive of 450+ editions. Pretty good deal, eh.
Here's everything in moderation from the last seven days(ish) — BW
Online abuse doesn’t stay on one platform, so neither can the response. Through Lantern, companies are sharing threat signals to detect and disrupt abuse networks more effectively.
Since launch, companies have shared 2M+ signals, supporting 350K+ enforcement actions across accounts, URLs, and content. Lantern shows how shared infrastructure can enable coordinated, real-world impact.
Policies
New and emerging internet policy and online speech regulation
Remember the visa restrictions placed on “foreign nationals” responsible for US censorship (EiM #294) and the five individuals sanctioned in December? Oral arguments in that lawsuit — Coalition for Independent Technology Research v. Rubio — were heard this week with attorneys for the non-profit arguing that the policy “is expansive and incredibly vague, and the chilling effects are correspondingly enormous.” Both Poynter and The Verge have good write ups.
Ofcom has issued a £950,000 fine to a suicide forum under the Online Safety Act in what it says "reflects the serious and deliberate nature of the contraventions”. The fine, which must be paid by 12th June, is the second largest after the one given to a porn company AVS Group Ltd back in December (EiM #317). The forum must also comply with a series of duties by the end of May in order to remain online.