Concerns were raised about efforts in Europe and the UK to tackle online hate and harassment, including by making social media platforms more transparent. As US writer Mathew Ingram reported in the Columbia Journalism Review, there was a risk of inhibiting free speech. Note that US law gives greater latitude on free speech, which is protected in the Constitution.
Twitter declined to take down inaccurate tweets from the far-right hate group Britain First that had been retweeted by Donald Trump, citing public interest. A BBC writer said Twitter gave no explanation of what it meant by “public interest”. Read more
Stories produced by overseas bureau but published by British news websites should not be subject to regulation in Britain unless they deal with UK topics, the Independent Press Standards Organisation has agreed. Read more
Media ethics is usually seen to be concerned with the conduct of journalists and those who employ them and publish their work. But does it also extend to the conduct of those who attack them – and the social media companies that facilitate such attacks?
It’s a US column talking about US law, but the general principle will apply: Steven Goldstein explains that streaming is (should be, anyway) covered by performing rights licences so the money gets to the rights holders, but a podcast is a recording, not a performance, and not covered by a licence. Read his piece here
Pictures and information may be considered private even if posted on sites such as Facebook, says new guidance from the Independent Press Standards Organisation on sourcing material from social media. It highlights issues of accuracy, privacy, children and grief under the Editors’ Code. Read the full guidance, with case studies and examples of rulings, here.
The Mail Online agreed to take down a video showing a bullying attack on a schoolgirl after the mother of one of the alleged bullies said it breached her daughter’s right to privacy. The Editor’s Code section on photographing children was also considered. The decision avoided the need for an IPSO ruling. Read more.