UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd is to urge social media companies to do more to remove online terrorist content during a series of meetings with tech giants including Twitter and Facebook, after a sharp increase in the number of plots foiled in the UK.
The home secretary is to warn that extremists have exploited Web platforms as way of spreading their “hateful messages” when she attends the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism in Silicon Valley.
British Prime Minister Theresa May had previously warned that the fight against the Islamic State (IS) was shifting from the “battlefield to the Internet” when she attended the G7 meeting in Sicily in the wake of the Manchester terror attack. World leaders called on Internet service providers to “substantially increase” their efforts to crackdown on extremist content.
Illustration: Tania Chou
“The responsibility for tackling this threat at every level lies with both governments and with industry. We have a shared interest: we want to protect our citizens and keep the free and open Internet we all love,” Rudd is expected to tell the Internet providers.
She is to claim that the forum, which was created by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube, marks an opportunity to start “turning the tide” on the issue. It comes after a 21-year-old from Slough, Taha Hussain, was found guilty of encouraging people to instigate, prepare or commit acts of terror including through online content.
After he was arrested, disturbing photographs were found on his phone alongside a YouTube channel that he had created, which claimed that no one should “feel sorry” for the deaths of non-Muslims and the “wrong kind” of Muslims.
His YouTube channel broadcast images of militants in battle, firing a range of weapons and blowing up vehicles and buildings, and included the black flag associated with the IS. Detectives also discovered that Hussain had sent a number of videos containing extremist propaganda via WhatsApp.
“Extremist posts like the ones Hussain posted and shared have the power to influence other people and particularly those who may be young and impressionable or vulnerable for a variety of reasons,” said detective chief superintendent Kath Barnes, head of Counter Terrorism Policing South East.
“This could lead to those influenced individuals committing acts of terror, which clearly has devastating effects on communities, the individual and their family and friends,” she said.
Rudd met tech companies after Khalid Masood drove a car into tourists gathered on Westminster Bridge and then murdered police constable Keith Palmer at the gates of parliament before being shot dead.
After the meeting, she said her starting point was that people who want to do harm should not be able to use the Internet or social media to further their cause.
“I want to make sure we are doing everything we can to stop this,” she said, warning that terrorist propaganda online was a “very real and evolving threat.”
The UK government was cited by tech companies as they moved toward creating the forum.
Monika Bickert, director of global policy management at Facebook, and Brian Fishman, the company’s counterterrorism policy manager, said they had been learning a lot through briefings from agencies in different countries about the IS and al-Qaeda propaganda mechanisms.
The companies, which have previously come under intense criticism for not taking the issue seriously enough, said the forum would aim to create new technological solutions that could help remove terrorist content.
They would also commission research to help them reach policy decisions, and work with counterterrorism experts, as well as governments, civil society groups and academics. The largest companies have promised to work with smaller outfits to support their efforts.
The British prime minister chose to focus on the issue of terrorism threats both at the G7 in Sicily, when she spoke about social media companies, and in the G20 in Hamburg, when she spoke about how to disrupt the financing of extremist groups.
That followed a series of terror attacks in the UK in quick succession, including the Westminster attack, the Manchester bombing in which 22 people were killed, and the London Bridge attacks that resulted in eight deaths and 48 being injured.
The UK Home Office admitted that there had been a sharp increase in the number of terror attacks foiled by the British security agencies, with five plots disrupted in just two months, compared with 12 in the period from 2013 to March this year. It has been reported that MI5 is juggling about 500 active investigations at one time with 3,000 people of interest.
However, Silicon Valley is expected to strongly resist Rudd’s demands.
“They [tech companies] are under intense pressure from the EU, from the media, from advertisers and the public. But they continue to stall and do a good job on PR, but not a good job on actually implementing these changes,” Counter Extremism Project senior adviser Hany Farid said.
Farid, a computer science professor at Dartmouth College, compared the efforts on terrorism to tech firms’ slowness to take action against content promoting child abuse and exploitation in the mid-2000s.
“I’m highly skeptical of the PR efforts that we’re seeing from tech,” he said. “It is not real action. It is trying to stave off legislation both at the EU, the UK and here in the States.”
At the first forum’s first workshop on Tuesday, the tech giants are to discuss strategies to “disrupt terrorists’ ability to use the Internet,” the companies said in a joint blogpost.
The statement cited goals to share best practices and technology, conduct and fund new research and recruit other firms to join the effort.
Critics have argued that private corporations are not well equipped to tackle such a complex problem on their own.
“There’s an immediate conflict of interest, which is these companies want to make money. The way that they capture information is built around a commercial purpose. That’s really very different than trying to discern what one’s political agenda is,” University at Albany professor of public administration and policy R. Karl Rethemeyer said.
Michael Smith, a terrorism analyst, said that he hoped Rudd would “call them out for their unwillingness to enable policies which would more effectively deter exploitations of their technologies by terrorists.”
The firms have generally opposed efforts to make it easier to identify and locate users, which could lead regulators in Europe and the US to try to force them to be more proactive in the way they track people, he said.
Although the companies have pledged to share information as part of their joint counterterrorism initiative, there are also profit motives in limiting such collaboration.
“The level of competition between those platforms is intense. There’s no particular commercial reason for them to share,” Rethemeyer said.
Pressure from officials like Rudd could encourage the companies to adopt internal policy changes in an effort to pre-empt regulations and other efforts to hold them legally liable.
There are, however, growing concerns that in the process, the social media platforms will increasingly censor people and violate users’ free speech rights, Electronic Frontier Foundation staff attorney Sophia Cope said.
“The potential for overbroad takedowns is just incredibly great, particularly when you get into those gray areas of political speech, dissenting speech, religious speech, where there is room for debate,” she said.
In recent months, Facebook has repeatedly come under fire for censoring journalists and activists in the name of combating terrorism, often reversing their decisions in the wake of negative media coverage.
While some regulators have pushed for greater technical solutions to weed out terrorist propaganda, there are also worries that machine learning and artificial intelligence fail to understand the context of content and can block speech that should not be censored.
“It’s not so simple to just throwing automated technology at the problem,” Cope said. “The technology just isn’t there yet to be able to sift out what they’re trying to target from what is considered legitimate speech.”
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been a cornerstone of US foreign policy, advancing not only humanitarian aid but also the US’ strategic interests worldwide. The abrupt dismantling of USAID under US President Donald Trump ‘s administration represents a profound miscalculation with dire consequences for global influence, particularly in the Indo-Pacific. By withdrawing USAID’s presence, Washington is creating a vacuum that China is eager to fill, a shift that will directly weaken Taiwan’s international position while emboldening Beijing’s efforts to isolate Taipei. USAID has been a crucial player in countering China’s global expansion, particularly in regions where
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
With the manipulations of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), it is no surprise that this year’s budget plan would make government operations difficult. The KMT and the TPP passing malicious legislation in the past year has caused public ire to accumulate, with the pressure about to erupt like a volcano. Civic groups have successively backed recall petition drives and public consensus has reached a fever-pitch, with no let up during the long Lunar New Year holiday. The ire has even breached the mindsets of former staunch KMT and TPP supporters. Most Taiwanese have vowed to use
Despite the steady modernization of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the international community is skeptical of its warfare capabilities. Late last month, US think tank RAND Corp published two reports revealing the PLA’s two greatest hurdles: personnel challenges and structural difficulties. The first RAND report, by Jennie W. Wenger, titled Factors Shaping the Future of China’s Military, analyzes the PLA’s obstacles with recruitment, stating that China has long been committed to attracting young talent from top universities to augment the PLA’s modernization needs. However, the plan has two major constraints: demographic changes and the adaptability of the PLA’s military culture.