🧵 So today we’ve got the Government’s vision for online harms legislation. It’s a landmark day for all of us who’ve worked for this for years. Some quick early (personal!) thoughts:

This is a systemic Duty of Care, with a requirement to risk assess - regularly - for reasonable foreseeable harms and to act on them. Supported by Codes but that serve as guardrails, not a prescriptive checklist

There’s a broad requirement on all services to tackle illegal content and to take measures to protect children. Worried that age assurance may be expected to do a lot of heavy lifting instead of proper moderation for legal but harmful, but we’ll see

The biggest weakness: enforcement measures. Criminal sanctions & named persons have deference value - that’s why industry pushed back strongly. But not for at least 2 years and even then only covering failure to comply with the regulator. If Govt thinks this is really enough...

Investigatory powers are OK (particularly pleased to see the inclusion of skilled persons reviews 😉). But the balance between investigatory powers and duties isn’t where it needs to be to drive culture change