New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron chaired the Christchurch Call to Action conference in Paris this month. Photo / Getty Images
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron chaired the Christchurch Call to Action conference in Paris this month. Photo / Getty Images
Opinion
EDITORIAL:
The democratic world, it seems, is in the grips of a polarising debate about free speech. At the forefront of the issue is just when free speech becomes hate speech, and whether in order to protect the former, the latter must also be allowed.
The internet is rife withthose who espouse its values - but often aggressively shut down those with a differing opinion. Have we become more sensitive? Are we less tolerant? And just how do we protect such a fundamental tenet of democracy without infringing on the rights - or safety - of others?
The issues will not be solved overnight, but a line in the sand has now been drawn.
At the Christchurch Call to Action in Paris it has been made clear that our freedom to livestream and view terrorist and violent extremist content - designed to sow fear, hatred and horror and inspire more of the same - should be curtailed. That, in this instance at least, our collective responsibilities should outweigh personal rights.
Facebook is among the tech giants pledging change in relation to online extremist content. Photo / Getty Images
That call is welcome, coming after - and indeed driven by - the horrific events in Christchurch on March 15, when the fatal attacks on Muslim worshippers at two mosques were livestreamed, viewed and shared by many thousands of people, and uploaded more than a million times.
Not all our traditional friends agree with the Paris agreement, however. The United States (with its often seemingly arbitrary and contrary takes on personal freedoms) has drawn a different line.
But 17 countries, the European Commission, and - significantly - eight major tech companies have signed up to the accord, led by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron. They have agreed on new principles, commitments, rules, strategies and technologies aimed at reducing harm and providing greater transparency online. An investor group worth a combined $5 trillion has also pledged to continue applying collective pressure to social media companies to "fulfil their duty of care to prevent harm to their users and to society".
So does this mass action mean we have finally seen the tipping point on corporate conscience?
Certainly, Christchurch has acted as a wake-up call for many. But the pressure on corporates to change their practices has in fact been mounting for some time - and changes have slowly but steadily been occurring.
Thousands of people gathered in Hagley Park, Christchurch, for a vigil to remember the victims of the March 15 mosque attacks. People power has helped persuade tech giants to change after the Christchurch attacks. Photo / File
Those investor funds now putting the pressure on? Some have themselves bowed to public pressure and aligned themselves with greener, more ethical, companies and products. Those omnipresent single-use plastic bags? Gone from the country's largest retailers, who previously said they couldn't possibly make that major change. It is no surprise then that the big tech companies - a major part of so many people's everyday lives - are now under the pump for a range of concerns including what they do with our personal information, and what content they allow on their platforms.
It is reassuring to know that public sentiment and pressure and strong leadership can make a difference to companies that previously seemed untouchable. Certainly, the sort of work required to deal with the darkest corners of the internet requires many hands at various levels.
