The Online Safety Bill is being reintroduced to Parliament today, but the bill still appears far from being ratified.
Several amendments have been proposed, but it is not possible to make most of these changes at the report stage. Therefore, the government intends to return a limited number of clauses to the Public Bill committee, allowing for thorough debate and scrutiny to the new amendments.
The Online Safety Bill has so far been under four different prime ministers and has greatly transformed throughout the different administrations.
The bill focuses on user-generated online forums, particularly social media platforms to ensure consumers can safely use the platform. Particular concerns are the spread of misinformation and protecting children in online spaces.
While it potentially offered more protection, the Bill’s strongest clause – “legal but harmful” – was most recently replaced after calls that the clause would infringe on people’s freedom of speech.
The ‘legal but harmful clause’ would have called on social media companies to remove not only illegal content, but content that would be deemed legal but would also be potentially harmful. In the bill, examples of content encouraging or glamorising eating disorders and self harm would fall under the category of ‘legal but harmful’ that companies would be liable to remove.
In the amendment, the clause was replaced with a ‘triple shield’ which would have companies remove illegal content and any content that was against their own terms of service – essentially allowing companies to devise their own litmus test for what ‘harmful’ means – and enable users to more easily curate their online experience and content they view.
Other major changes to the bill would include criminalising the encouragement of self-harm.
The encouragement of self-harm has been a major topic of discussion with the bill, particularly in regards to protecting children.
Parents who lost their children to suicide have been major proponents of stricter regulations of online content by companies, and are conflicted by the news. While criminalisation is a forward step, the law change may not do enough to remove or define the content.
Further offences have been added to the draft bill previously, including revenge porn, the sale of illicit drugs or weapons, sexual exploitation, hate crimes, fraud, and people smuggling. Downblousing and upskirt images would also be made illegal under the Bill’s propositions.
Recommended
- LastPass cybersecurity breach | Here’s what you need to know
- Glasgow startup bags share of £73m clean transport fund
- Scots microwave MedTech company acquires US distributor
Ofcom will be in charge of making sure social media companies abide by their own terms of service for content moderation, and will be able to issue fines if they are found in breach of these or the law.
Other aspects of the law include monitoring fake news and misleading information. The law actually provides greater freedoms to online journalists, allowing them to appeal removal of their content and disallowing companies to arbitrarily remove content for review.
The bill has faced scrutiny and backlash throughout its journey since it was first introduced under PM Theresa May.
A large swatch of tech workers said the bill was unworkable and would certainly curtail freedom of speech. Others claimed the bill would do little to nothing to actually stop the spread of harmful content and protect consumers.
The most recent form of the bill and the triple shield hoped to mitigate critiques on both sides, but has yet to fully assuage critics, with some saying the government has merely weakened the bill by removing its ‘legal but harmful’ clause.
Still, the bill as it stands will not necessarily make it to the next stage as the amendments must be properly vetted.
Get all the latest news from DIGIT direct to your inbox
Our newsletter covers the latest technology and IT news from Scotland and beyond, as well as in-depth features and exclusive interviews with leading figures and rising stars.
To subscribe, click here.





