\n
![](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/rsoftsolution.com\/blog\/wp-content\/plugins\/RSSPoster_PRO\/cache\/d9ca4_hatespeech-tilt.jpg?w=640&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
It\u2019s been\u00a0a year<\/a> since the four major social platform players agreed with Europe\u2019s executive body to a voluntary Code of Conduct for removing illegal hate speech within 24 hours of a complaint being received.<\/p>\n A lot has happened on this front since then, with a series of content moderation scandals hitting different platforms and serving to ramp up the regional pressure on the tech giants \u2014 including YouTube suffering an advertiser backlash<\/a> over ads being served up next to extremist content; and Facebook accused of a series of\u00a0moderation failures<\/a>, including around child abuse and terrorist content. Not to mention fake news gate<\/a>.<\/p>\n In Germany the government is now leaning towards legislating to levy fines of up to \u20ac50 million<\/a>\u00a0on social media platforms if they do not remove illegal hate speech promptly \u2014 claiming tech giants have not been doing enough (a UK parliamentary committee also concluded more needs to be done last month<\/a>, and has urged the government to consider introducing fines as well).<\/p>\n But today the European Commission, at least, is trumpeting what it dubs \u201csignificant progress\u201d on illegal hate speech takedowns by Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft vs their performance six months prior. Though it also cautions some challenges remain.<\/p>\n Illegal hate speech is defined in EU law\u00a0as the public incitement to violence or hatred on the basis of certain characteristics, including race, color, religion, descent and national or ethnic origin.<\/p>\n When the four tech firms receive a request to remove content from their online platforms they assess the request against their rules and community guidelines \u2014 but also, in Europe where applicable, against national laws on combating racism and xenophobia. So they are making judgements on whether content can be considered illegal online hate speech, and if so they have agreed to take it down \u2014 aiming to do so within 24 hours of a report being received.<\/p>\n The EC argues that removing illegal hate speech is not censorship but rather helps defend the right to freedom of expression because threats can prevent people from feeling able to freely express their views.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n A majority of illegal hate speech is now being removed<\/strong><\/p>\n The evaluation of the voluntary Code of Conduct, a year in, found that on average in a majority (59 per cent) of cases the tech platforms responded to notifications concerning illegal hate speech by removing the content \u2014 which constitutes a more than 2x rise on the removal level recorded (28 per cent) in the first evaluation of the code, six months ago.<\/p>\n It also found an improvement in the amount of notifications reviewed within 24 hours \u2014 up from 40 per cent to a majority (51 per cent) in the same six month period.<\/p>\n Although it notes that Facebook is the only company that \u201cfully achieves the target of reviewing the majority of notifications within the day\u201d.<\/p>\n Other areas for improvement the evaluation highlights are discrepancies between when a citizen reports content vs when an organization reports content.<\/p>\n So while it notes some progress on this front, with tech platforms apparently improving how they handle citizen complaints, it also says \u201csome differences persist\u201d, and that overall removal rates remain lower when a notification originates from the public.<\/p>\n The evaluation also points to ongoing discrepancies between tech platforms in their feedback systems for users who report content \u2014 with only Facebook sending \u201csystematic feedback\u201d to inform a person how their\u00a0notification has been assessed.<\/p>\n \u201cPractices differed considerably among the IT companies. Quality of feedback motivating the decision is an area where further progress can be made,\u201d it adds.<\/p>\n The EC is drawing on an evaluation carried out in 24 Member States by NGOs and public bodies for this assessment. Whereas the German government has been basing its assessment of social giants\u2019 performance on hate speech removals on reports from local youth protection organization,\u00a0jugendschutz.net<\/a>. (And in\u00a0March<\/a>, it used that assessment as a basis for criticizing Facebook and Twitter especially for not doing enough to promptly remove illegal hate speech \u2014 and also introduced a draft provision to legislate for fines of up to\u00a0\u20ac50M<\/a>.)<\/p>\n In this, the second evaluation of the EU Code of Conduct, 2,575 notifications were submitted to the tech firms taking part in the code \u2014 a 4x increase vs the first monitoring exercise, in December 2016. While Facebook received the largest amount of notifications (1,273 cases), followed by YouTube (658 cases) and Twitter (644 cases). Microsoft did not receive any.<\/p>\n Making some general observations, the evaluation said that within the last year the four platform giants have strengthened their reporting systems and made it easier to report hate speech.<\/p>\n They have also trained staff and \u2014 in the EC\u2019s words \u2014 \u201cincreased their cooperation with civil society\u201d.<\/p>\n The EC further suggests the Code of Conduct has helped tackle the spread of illegal hate speech in the region by\u00a0strengthening and enlarging the tech firms\u2019 network of \u201ctrusted flaggers\u201d throughout Europe.<\/p>\n And it argues that via increased co-operation with civil society organizations the tech platforms have gained \u201ca higher quality of notifications\u201d, which in turn is yielding \u201cmore effective handling times and better results in terms of reactions to the notifications\u201d.<\/p>\n V\u0115ra Jourov\u00e1, the European Union commissioner for justice, consumers and gender equality, described the results of the one-year evaluation as \u201cencouraging\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is an important step in the right direction and shows that a self-regulatory approach can work, if all actors do their part,\u201d she said in a statement.<\/p>\n \u201cAt the same time, companies carry a great responsibility and need to make further progress to deliver on all the commitments. For me, it is also important that the IT companies provide better feedback to those who notified cases of illegal hate speech content,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n In another supporting statement, Andrus Ansip, the EC\u2019s VP for the digital single market, added: \u201cWorking closely with the private sector and civil society to fight illegal hate speech brings results, and we will redouble our joint efforts.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are now working to ensure closer coordination between the different initiatives and forums that we have launched with online platforms. We will also bring more clarity to notice and action procedures to remove illegal content in an efficient way \u2014 while preserving freedom of speech, which is essential.\u201d<\/p>\n