Session
Organizer 1: arda gerkens, ATKM
Organizer 2: Auke Pals, 🔒
Organizer 3: Dorijn Boogaard, NL IGF
Organizer 4: Marjolijn Bonthuis Bonthuis, 🔒NLIGF
Speaker 1: arda gerkens, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Mashilo Boloka, Intergovernmental Organization, African Group
Speaker 3: Flavia Alves, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Auke Pals, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 5: Graeme Bunton, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Marjolijn Bonthuis Bonthuis, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Dorijn Boogaard, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Auke Pals, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Classroom
Duration (minutes): 90
Format description: Content moderation is a sensitive topic within internet governance. Who decides what is allowed online? How can we prevent censorship? How do we ensure that the internet remains an open and free space? Who plays a role in this? We expect that there will be a lot of interest in this theme. To facilitate a conversation with active audience participation, we opt for a 90-minute classroom discussion. To discover our differences and identify our similarities, it is essential that we enter into dialogue, each from our own discipline. The panel therefore consists of experts who not only represent the various stakeholders, but are also diverse in region, gender and age. The audience is actively involved in the discussion through polls and the ideas they put forward can be directly tested by the panel members.
A. In what way can we shape collobaration between Regulators and Industry without Regulators losing their independancy? B. What role can technical and infrastructural actors play in combatting illegal material online? C. How do we prevent legislation that threatens the open en free internet, whilst addressing illegal and harmful content?
What will participants gain from attending this session? Attendees will learn new insights on internet governance and how to implement this in their field. They will learn about initiatives taken to combat online illegal and harmful content. Participants will understand the need of the multistakeholder model in internet governance better and will learn good examples of how the model is implemented in other countries in various ways. The outcome is a positive one: By working together we can keep the internet open and safe.
Description:
With the increasing digitalization of our society, a growing number of people face illegal content that not only affects them personally but have a disrupting effect on society. Two main examples are Child Sexual Abuse Material and Terrorist Content Online. To combat the distribution of CSAM and TCO, more often regulatory measures are being proposed. The downside is that it jeopardizes net neutrality and in some cases even online safety. The Internet industry wishes to protect its users and preserve the image of the Internet sector. In turn, governments are challenged to enforce illegal activities on the Internet and there is an expectation that they will protect citizens from this, or enable them to stand up for their own rights. To achieve these mutual interests, and prevent devastating legislation, the Internet sector and the governments need each other. As we navigate the path forward, it is therefore becoming increasingly clear that a multistakeholder approach is necessary to shape the future of online content moderation. Join us for an engaging session in which you can immerse yourself in one of the stakeholder groups within the online content moderation ecosystem. Get familiar with the various interests and how to collaboratively arrive at effective solutions. In this workshop we will speak with Regulators and how they cooperate with industry. We will also hear how DNS abuse can be tackled. Last nut not least Meta will tell us about their cooperation in the multi stakeholder environment.
The panelists will be involved in drafting the statements. We would like to engage with participants of other workshops/panels on CSAM and TCO, to see if we can draft a common statement on the eradication of online illegal material.
Hybrid Format: Interaction between onsite and online speakers and attendees will be encouraged by using Mentimeter to facilitate interaction during the plenary part. We will hold polls on statements, ask the public why they voted what for something and go back to the panelist to give their views. Mentimeter can easily be used online too. We can actively ask online participants to give them their view, so we can engage them in the discussion. The panelists will be involved in drafting the statements. We would like to engage with participants of other workshops/panels on CSAM and TCO, to see if we can draft a common statement on the eradication of this online material.
Report
Keep this discusion between this wide range of stakeholders going!
Insights on Internet Governance: Attendees gained new perspectives on balancing safety and freedom within internet governance frameworks. Best Practices: Examples from various regions demonstrated how different approaches to regulation can address harmful content without threatening internet openness. Multistakeholder Model: Reinforced the importance of collaboration across governments, industry, technical communities, and civil society for effec
Summary #137 Combating Illegal Content with a Multistakeholder approach
Organizers: Arda Gerkens (ATKM), Auke Pals (KPMG), Dorijn Boogaard (NL IGF), Marjolijn Bonthuis (NL IGF)
Speakers:
- Arda Gerkens, Government (WEOG)
- Mozart Tenorio, Intergovernmental Organization (Grulac)
- Deepali Liberhan, Private Sector (WEOG)
- Auke Pals, Technical Community (WEOG)
- Graeme Bunton, Technical Community (WEOG)
- Tim Scott, Technical Community (WEOG)
Moderator: Auke Pals, Technical Community (WEOG)
Online Moderator: Dorijn Boogaard, Civil Society (WEOG)
Rapporteur: Marjolijn Bonthuis, Intergovernmental Organization (WEOG)Auke Pals, Technical Community (WEOG)
During the workshop the discussion was started by asking the participants their reaction on statements via Mentimeter.
Policy Questions:
A. How can collaboration between regulators and industry be shaped without compromising regulators’ independence?
B. What roles can technical and infrastructural actors play in combating illegal online material?
C. How do we address illegal and harmful content through legislation without threatening internet freedom?
Summary
INTRODUCTION
After introducing the panel, Arda Gerkens, president and chair of the ATKM explained ATKM’s role, emphasizing its engagement in regulatory discussions and partnerships with platforms for improved online safety. In short The Autoriteit Online Terroristisch en Kinderpornografisch Materiaal (ATKM) is a pioneering regulatory body in the Netherlands, uniquely tasked with addressing both online terrorist content and child sexual abuse material (CSAM). As one of the first authorities worldwide with this dual focus, it combines proactive monitoring, rapid removal orders, and close collaboration with law enforcement and hosting providers to combat harmful online content. Balancing strict enforcement with the protection of freedom of expression, the ATKM plays a critical role in implementing EU regulations and setting a global example in safeguarding the digital space.
- Meta highlighted their multi-faceted safety approach, partnerships with over 500 safety experts, and local compliance with legislative regimes while balancing free speech and content removal.
- Anatel (Brazilian regulator): Regulators cannot directly manage content but enforce court orders. NIC.BR ensures compliance at the DNS level, though challenges remain with geoblocking and content takedowns.
- Roblox focused on a multi-stakeholder approach to user safety, partnerships, and identifying risks.
- Public Interest Registry (.ORG)/DNSABUSE: Addressed challenges in tackling harmful content at the DNS level, working with organizations like the Internet Watch Foundation to suspend domains associated with illegal material.
KEY THEMES DISCUSSED
- Collaboration Between Regulators and Industry:
- Emphasis on regulators maintaining independence while working closely with industry stakeholders.
- The importance of a balanced approach to ensure both accountability and freedom.
- Brazil lacks content-specific regulation; the UK is advancing its Online Safety Act with a collaborative, forensic approach.
- Platforms like Meta and Roblox discussed measures for child protection and transparency in takedowns.
- Concerns over balancing regulation with free speech and platform independence.
- Smaller tech companies often evade regulatory frameworks.
- Role of Technical and Infrastructural Actors:
- Highlighting DNS-level action as an essential tool to disrupt illegal activities.
- Cooperation between technical entities like registries and initiatives such as the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF).
- PIR advocated for voluntary practices and registries stepping in against abuse.
- Calls for global solutions due to the internet's borderless nature.
- Legislation and Cooperation:
- The need for dialogue and shared responsibility among platforms, regulators, and society was emphasized.
- Brazil and the Netherlands highlighted legal advancements and enforcement mechanisms to combat abuse.
- Balancing Legislation and Internet Freedom:
- Struggles with overregulation and potential censorship versus the need to protect users.
- Sharing good practices from countries like the UK (Online Safety Act) and Brazil, showcasing different regulatory models.
Takeaways for Participants:
- Insights on Internet Governance: Attendees gained new perspectives on balancing safety and freedom within internet governance frameworks.
- Best Practices: Examples from various regions demonstrated how different approaches to regulation can address harmful content without threatening internet openness.
- Multistakeholder Model: Reinforced the importance of collaboration across governments, industry, technical communities, and civil society for effective governance.
Conclusion:
The panel agreed on the necessity of dialogue, a robust DNS approach, and legislation to balance free internet with the fight against illegal and harmful content. Shared responsibility and the multistakeholder model in shaping policies that preserve the open and free nature of the internet while addressing illegal and harmful content is critical to achieving a safer online environment. There was a lively discussion between panellist and participants in the room, bringing together different stakeholders. The discussion was very open and at the end of the workshop there was a mutual demand to proceed the debate. Panellists and participants of the workshop all agreed that such a discussion creates more understanding between the stakeholders and is valuable to balance online moderation with respect for Human Rights. We all felt this was a successful workshop with a lot of interaction.