{"title":"Balancing the platform responsibility paradox: A case for amplification regulation to mitigate the spread of harmful but legal content online","authors":"Tae Jung Park , Akshita Rohatgi","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines the complex issue of harmful but legal content (HBLC) moderation on the internet, focusing on the contentious nature of specific content categories regulation and the emergence of an alternative approach, regulating these categories under the umbrella of HBLC. It highlights the fundamental difference between legal and illegal content and the irony when platforms face more liability than the principal poster for failing to take down legal, albeit harmful content, posted by third parties. Instead, it argues that platforms should be held accountable for amplifying harmful content due to the role of their recommender systems in promoting this content for engagement purposes. While challenging to conceptualise, the concept of amplification regulation is scrutinised in relation to HBLC and the potential ways of implementing such regulation are examined. Furthermore, the paper delves into the dynamic between the State and online platforms in the context of HBLC and amplification regulation, emphasising the need for a balanced approach tailored to each jurisdiction's context.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026736492400027X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper examines the complex issue of harmful but legal content (HBLC) moderation on the internet, focusing on the contentious nature of specific content categories regulation and the emergence of an alternative approach, regulating these categories under the umbrella of HBLC. It highlights the fundamental difference between legal and illegal content and the irony when platforms face more liability than the principal poster for failing to take down legal, albeit harmful content, posted by third parties. Instead, it argues that platforms should be held accountable for amplifying harmful content due to the role of their recommender systems in promoting this content for engagement purposes. While challenging to conceptualise, the concept of amplification regulation is scrutinised in relation to HBLC and the potential ways of implementing such regulation are examined. Furthermore, the paper delves into the dynamic between the State and online platforms in the context of HBLC and amplification regulation, emphasising the need for a balanced approach tailored to each jurisdiction's context.
期刊介绍:
CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.