Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

REGULATING THE ONLINE PUBLIC SPHERE: From Decentralized Networks to Public Regulation (Conference at Columbia, "worst school for free speech," register for free)
Columbia University ^ | September 20, 2022 | N/A

Posted on 09/28/2022 6:20:26 AM PDT by DoodleBob

The stakes could not be higher for finding a solution for how to regulate the global public sphere, with the survival of modern democratic governance hanging in the balance. The power the big platforms wield over public discourse has distorted the marketplace of ideas, to a point where there is broad consensus internationally that some form of state intervention is necessary. In the United States, that realization is particularly contentious as it is at odds with US tradition and the First Amendment, which favors competition over regulation not only of the economy but also of ideas. As frustrations rise over how to address these issues, and competing visions of regulation emerge from the Digital Markets Act in Europe, to the Access Act in the United States, to the Texas Social Media Law, alternative technical solutions, rather than political ones, look increasingly worthy of consideration.

In this context, Columbia Global Freedom of Expression and Justitia present the “Regulating the Online Public Sphere: From Decentralized Networks to Public Regulation” Conference, which will take place on October 3 & 4, 2022. On the first day, speakers will discuss new models of decentralized networks and, on the second day, the different regional approaches to public and private regulation of content moderation on the Internet. The conference is an initiative of the Future of Free Speech project.

Participants can register to receive the links for the event and join virtually. The conference will be livestreamed on the GFoE YouTube channel.

[Agenda PDF Linked Here]

Agenda

Day 1 – Monday, October 3, 2022

10:00-10:10amWelcome Remarks by Columbia University
10:10-10:20amPresentation of the First Day
Jacob Mchangama, Founder and Executive Director, Justitia and Future of Free Speech Project
10:20-11:50am

Session I: Mapping the Decentralized Ecosystem

Moderator: Mike Masnick, CEO, The Copia Institute
Speakers:
Daphne Keller, Director of Program on Platform Regulation, Stanford Cyber Policy Center
Golda Velez, Co-Founder, Cooperation.org (Community builder for BlueSky)

Alex Feerst, CEO, Murmuration Labs – Law, Policy, Trust & Safety
Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School
11:50-12:00pmBreak
12:00-1:30pm
Session II: How to Get There from Here? Regulatory Requirements and Necessary Standards

Moderator:
Kate Klonick, Associate Professor of Law, St John’s University
Speakers:
Barbora Bukovská, Senior Director for Law and Policy, ARTICLE 19
Cory Doctorow, Special Advisor, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Andrew McLaughlin, Co-founder, Higher Ground Labs; Board Chair, Access Now
Zoe Darmé, Senior Manager, Search, Government Affairs and Public Policy at Google

2:30-2:35pm

 

Greetings from UNESCO & The Way Forward in Multilateral Regulatory Policy
Guilherme Canela Godoi, Chief of the section of Freedom of Expression and Safety of Journalists, UNESCO
2:35-4:15pmSession III: Business Viability: Decentralizing Power and Opening Up Competition

Moderator:
Farzaneh Badiei, Head of Outreach and Engagement, Digital Trust and Safety Partnership
Speakers:
Michael Lwin, Managing Director & Co-Founder, Koe Koe Tech
Alison McCauley, Chief Advocacy Officer, Unfinished Labs
Dave McGibbon, Founder & CEO, Passbase

Day 2 – Tuesday, October 4, 2022

10:00-10:10amOpening Remarks & Presentation of the Second Day
Catalina Botero, Columbia Global Freedom of Expression; Co-Chair, Oversight Board of Meta
10:10-11:30amSession IV, Part 1: Regulating Online Speech: Between the First Amendment and the Digital Services Act

Moderator: Pamela San Martin, Board Member, Oversight Board of Meta
Speakers:
David Kaye, Clinical Professor of Law, University of California, Irvine
Matthias C. Kettemann, Professor of Innovation, University of Innsbruck; Research Program Leader, Leibniz-Institute for Media Research | Hans-Bredow-Institut
Agustina Del Campo, Director, Centro de Estudios en Libertad de Expresión y Acceso a la Información (CELE)
11:30-11:35amBreak
11:35-12:50pm
Session IV, Part 2: Regulating Online Speech: Between the First Amendment and the Digital Services Act

Moderator: Jamal Greene, Dwight Professor of Law, Columbia Law School; Co-Chair, Oversight Board of Meta
Speakers
Suzanne Nossel, Chief Executive Officer, PEN America
Jacob Mchangama, Founder and Executive Director, Justitia and the Future of Free Speech Project
Martin Fertmann, Researcher, Leibniz-Institute for Media Research | Hans-Bredow-Institut
1:30-2:45pm

 

Session V: International Human Rights Law as the Basic Framework of Meta’s Oversight Board Decisions
Co-hosted in partnership with the Oversight Board of Meta

Moderator: Joel Simon, Fellow, Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia Journalism School
Speakers:
Joan Barata, Intermediary Liability Fellow, Stanford Cyber Policy Center
Daphne Keller, Director of Program on Platform Regulation, Stanford Cyber Policy Center
Susan Benesch, Founder and Director, Dangerous Speech Project
Kate Klonick, Associate Professor of Law, St John’s University
Monroe Price, Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-legal Studies, Oxford University
2:45-3:15pm Break
3:15-4:30pm

 

(ONLINE ONLY IN SPANISH) Sesión VI: El derecho internacional de los derechos humanos como marco de las decisiones del Consejo de Supervisión de Meta
Co-hosted in partnership with the Oversight Board of Meta

Moderador & Presentación: Joan Barata, Intermediary Liability Fellow at Cyber Policy Center, Stanford University
Panelistas:
Susan Benesch, Founder and Director, Dangerous Speech Project
Agustina Del Campo, Director, Centro de Estudios en Libertad de Expresión y Acceso a la Información (CELE)
Carlos Cortés Castillo, Co-Founder, Linterna Verde

*All times are in Eastern Standard Time (EST).

Day 1: The Future of Decentralized Networks and Free Speech

Decentralized network models, such as “middleware,” federated and distributed, have gained attention in recent years as a remedy for a variety of informational harms while protecting freedom of speech. These networks, based on open protocols coordinating with the existing platforms, would enable diverse applications with unique interfaces where users have greater control over their content curation, privacy and data. Blockchain technologies further offer possible solutions to the viral spread of disinformation, and the preservation of content over time, among others. They would not only create competition in the marketplace but also restore control over communications to the individual, in keeping with the original vision of the internet before it was co-opted by big companies. These models could significantly reduce the levels of information abuse as each user would be able to select transparent filters based on their own interests and privacy levels, thereby also reducing the need for external regulation or censorship. Each of these alternatives offer a range of solutions, however, they also come with their own risks if they are not compliant with international human rights standards from the beginning.

What is clear at this moment in time, is that “you can’t get there from here.” Hence, the first challenges are how to enable their evolution in light of today’s market concentration and regulatory environment. Examples of decentralized networks have been around for years, but they have not gained substantial market share, and one of the most promising versions, BlueSky, is still under development. Platforms will ultimately need to either be forced through antitrust laws to open up competition, or willingly support these new protocols-based systems as an option to the intractable and costly problems of current content moderation. Other requirements for their viability include sufficient levels of interoperability across the ecosystem, as well as mandatory access, which will require regulatory intervention similar to what has taken place in the telecommunications sector. Such changes could create opportunities for new business models which are not driven by data monetization, but rather are service based such as for content curation or private datastores. For any of the above to come to fruition, and to avoid mistakes of the past, now is the time to set the necessary standards and policies that are rights protective for these new ecosystems and pro-actively consider how to mitigate the associated risks.

To that end, The Future of Free Speech Project and Columbia Global Freedom of Expression seek to bring together a group of stakeholders from the technology industry, civil society and academia for a conference to foster a participatory dialogue from a global perspective. The purpose of the conference is to build a holistic understanding of the challenges at hand. Likewise, we aim to promote knowledge of digital innovation and good practices in Freedom of Expression and facilitate the exchange of experiences between key actors regarding emerging decentralized networks, existing norms and standards (hard and soft law) in the field, and the implications for Human Rights.

Session I

This panel will define the main decentralized network models, including federated and distributed/blockchain, and discuss the technical solutions they offer, and cannot offer, for content moderation and curation. They will further consider how each addresses the problems of algorithmic transparency, disinformation and censorship, and then assess the risk factors, such as filter bubbles/extremist communities and data privacy concerns. The panel will assess how to prioritize the competing values and goals, to identify what guarantees and safeguards are necessary to ensure the protection of users’ rights in these models.

Session II

This session will explore the market and regulatory challenges to creating an enabling environment for these alternative networks. Speakers will consider necessary minimum standards and what policies should be considered to ensure the protection of human rights are built into the different phases of evolution. Specifically, they will address unbundling and mandatory access, interoperability, data portability, and privacy protection.

Session III

The moderator will speak with representatives of leading companies to learn about the market challenges they face, their strategies for navigating the current landscape and what incentives they think would improve innovation and competition. Panelists share their perspectives on why and how the market must change to support new players, but also to avoid the “race to the bottom.” They will explore what kind of business models are emerging as alternatives to monetizing data that allow for profitability but also ensure transparency, data protection, and adequate affordable curation.

Day 2: Regulating Online Speech

Despite the latest alternatives of decentralized moderation, such as the ones that will be discussed on the first day of the conference, there are also different proposals for public regulation of freedom of expression in the digital sphere which are fundamental to discuss. The technological optimism that accompanied the emergence of social networks suggested that the absence of regulation was the best way for these networks to optimize their democratizing potential. However, over time, social networks have become not only a place through which people connect, access knowledge, discuss issues of public interest and exercise greater political control, but also a space where harms – such as hate speech, discrimination, harassment, bullying, among others – proliferate and result in actual torment in people’s lives offline and a challenge for democracy.

Faced with this new reality, platforms have expanded their powers by implementing new community rules online while also substantially increasing the amount of content they remove. In this context, legitimate claims have arisen that must be addressed regarding, on the one hand, the proliferation of speech that cause damage to people without sufficient remedies and, on the other hand, an “over”moderation of content by the platforms that is opaque, which can exclude content that is protected by freedom of expression from the digital conversation. Therefore, it is essential to discuss the existing regulatory options including recent legislatives proposals, the Texas Social Media Law, the proposals promoted by presidents such as Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, and the Digital Services package in Europe.

Consequently, the second day of the conference will analyze the distinct alternative approaches to the regulation of online speech between the U.S., Europe and Latin America. The panels will focus on the advantages of different regional regulatory approaches, on state and private speech regulation, on regulation through procedural and transparency duties, and situate online speech regulation within the challenges of ensuring human rights and social cohesion in digitalized communication spaces. The discussion will also include existing proposals for regulated self-regulation and compare and contrast regional case-law.

Session IV

These panels seek to analyze the distinct alternative approaches to the regulation of online speech between the U.S., Europe and Latin America. The panels will focus on the advantages of different regional regulatory approaches, on state and private speech regulation, on regulation through procedural and transparency duties, and situate online speech regulation within the challenges of ensuring human rights and social cohesion in digitalized communication spaces.

Session V & Session VI

The Meta Oversight Board was created to help “answer some of the most difficult questions around freedom of expression online: what to take down, what to leave up and why”. The Board can also make policy recommendations for changes in the way that the company operates its community standards and practices. One of the key tasks of the Board is to assess consistency between content decisions taken by Facebook and Instagram and their own internal (private) principles and rules. The overview of the decisions adopted so far by the OSB shows that the Board has used a solid human rights-based approach, putting international legal standards at the center of its internal debates and determinations. This scrutiny has even taken the Board, in some cases, to the point of criticizing Community Standards and other moderation documents as the basis for the final decision, thus recommending their repeal or reform.

The panels will discuss how human rights have become the basic framework of the decisions of the Board, and how legal standards originally established to protect individuals vis-à-vis limitations imposed by State authorities have been adapted to the completely different reality of privately enforcing content policies at scale. Another important matter for debate is to what extent the Board is a solution to be adopted by different types of platforms as a tool for better handling conflicts around content moderation and improving consistency and respect for human rights. Moreover, will this instrument reshape the legal interpretation of human rights in the digital realm? Can we expect a dialogue between the Board(s) doctrine and the standards set by international bodies and regional courts? Could decisions of the only existing oversight board end (so far) up setting the basic constitutional standards of content moderation across platforms? Would in any case this be a desirable outcome?



TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Computers/Internet; Education; Society
KEYWORDS: bigtech; columbia; freespeech

1 posted on 09/28/2022 6:20:26 AM PDT by DoodleBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

If you’re old enough you may recall that the 1960s “youth rebellion” started at Columbia University. Yes even a bit before Berkeley. All the youth leaders had Communist parents, but this was not reported at the time.


2 posted on 09/28/2022 6:30:14 AM PDT by Salman (It's not a slippery slope if it was part of the program all along. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

Columbia is not in America. Columbia is in New York City


3 posted on 09/28/2022 6:42:30 AM PDT by bert ( (KWE. NP. N.C. +12) Juneteenth is inequality day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

Alot of words just to say: “we’re going to go full blown fascist on your speech”


4 posted on 09/28/2022 6:44:47 AM PDT by lowbridge ("Let’s check with Senator Schumer before we run it" - NY Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

The NY Times has offers.

“All the news that’s fit to print.”


5 posted on 09/28/2022 6:53:32 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

The ISPs could bundle in media subscriptions.


6 posted on 09/28/2022 6:55:33 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

“The power the big platforms wield over public discourse has distorted the marketplace of ideas, to a point where there is broad consensus internationally that some form of state intervention is necessary.”

Ha. “Big Tech” thought by being compliant tools of the left, they would be protected. Now they find out they are to be discarded when the left finds it convenient.

Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people.


7 posted on 09/28/2022 7:38:05 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob

After drilling down into the speakers/panels and the subject matter, it seems clear to me that the conference will wind up with a distinctly authoritarian slant to regulation of free speech.

I say this with the sadness of a Columbia alumnus from 1961 when we were on the cutting edge of free speech non-regulation and I spent many happy hours debating all kinds of stuff on the open air debate area on Low Plaza.


8 posted on 09/28/2022 11:59:33 AM PDT by wildbill (The older I get, the less the term 'life in prison" scares me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleBob
Conservatives need to set up a Conference on "Ways to Criminally Punish Academics Undermining The First Amendment"

>
Three days - list of speakers: *add 10 names = two can play this game.

9 posted on 09/28/2022 12:12:11 PM PDT by GOPJ (STOP "PROCESSING" ILLEGALS. Democrats will use processing as 'documentation' proof.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson