Online Library

The focus of this paper is on the extremist group Britain First. As such, it does not explore online terrorist activity but rather examines how a group regarded as extremist is subject to online sanctions. The removal of the extremist group Britain First from Facebook in March 2018 successfully disrupted the group’s online activity, leading them to have to start anew on Gab, a different and considerably smaller social media platform. The removal also resulted in the group having to seek new online followers from a much smaller, less diverse recruitment pool. This paper demonstrates the further impact of the group’s platform migration on their online strategy – particularly on their choice of images and the engagement levels generated through them. The paper puts forward a number of key recommendations, most importantly that social-media companies should continue to censor and remove hateful content.

VOX-Pol Blog Post.

Tech platforms have been through several regulatory phases concerning the countering of terrorist content on their platforms: from a lack of regulation, to the government demands of self-regulation, to the present day where regulation has been implemented across the world. Much of this regulation, however, has been heavily criticised. After consideration of these criticisms, and research into regulatory approaches in a range of other industries, this article proposes a responsive regulatory approach to countering online terrorist content. Responsive regulation argues that regulation should be responsive to specific industry structure because different structures are conducive to different degrees and forms of regulation. This article categorizes tech platforms based on different compliance issues: awareness and expertise; capacity; and willingness. It then proposes four regulatory tracks in response, in order to try to mitigate the occurrence of these compliance issues.

After a period of self‐regulation, countries around the world began to implement regulations for the removal of terrorist content from tech platforms. However, much of this regulation has been criticised for a variety of reasons, most prominently for concerns of infringing free speech and creating unfair burdens for smaller platforms. In addition to this, regulation is heavily centred around content moderation, however, fails to consider or address the psychosocial risks it poses to human content moderators. This paper argues that where regulation has been heavily criticised yet continues to inspire similar regulation a new regulatory approach is required. The aim of this paper is to undertake an introductory examination of the use of a social regulation approach in three other industries (environmental protection, consumer protection and occupational health and safety) to learn and investigate new regulatory avenues that could be applied to the development of new regulation that seeks to counter terrorist content on tech platforms and is concerned with the safety of content moderators.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

VOX-Pol Blog post.