[kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

Sat Aug 19 08:01:01 EAT 2017

Hi listers,

(a) Should the spreading of Fake News be a crime? -
This thing is not a new problem as we think. Defamation is a form of
spreading fake news especially if you look at the elements. I think we
should consider the damage element before advocating for censorship.

 How about when Fake News leads to incitement?
We have enough laws on hate speech which are selectively implemented.
Our 'grundnorm' has provisions on hate speech (Art. 33(2)) and other
laws. So we just need to implement those laws.

(b) The NCIC (National Cohesion and Integration Commission) and the CA
(Communications Authority); do these agencies have the sufficient
mandate to combat Fake News?
These agencies have very brilliant chaps who can sufficiently combat
damaging Fake News.

(c) Is it time we reguated social media use?
Regulate social media? :-D  We have already over regulated our speech
because of the events of 2007. If people want to spread damaging fake
news, they will do so even without social media. They have done that
in the past, what will stop them now?

On 18/08/2017, Fadzai Madzingira via kictanet
<kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
> Dear List
>
> As many people on this list have already pointed out, false news is not a
> new problem. That said, Facebook takes fighting false information seriously
> because people want to see accurate information on Facebook. In light of
> that we have set
>
> These issues are complicated, and we want to be very careful. In a free
> society, there is not always a clear line between hoaxes, satire and opinion
> — and we want to ensure that people can share their opinions as was also so
> considerately highlighted in conversations on Day 1 of these excellent
> discussions. At the same time, we are careful not to be the arbiters of
> truth and that as a platform, we are not overstepping. Getting it right will
> take time, we need to ensure that as we help people get the meaningful
> information they want.
>
> We also want to de-incentivize the bad, by contesting fabricated and false
> news so that publishers can't extract value from people without providing
> value in return. This involves:
>
>      *   Reducing Spam: We're testing ways to make fake news less profitable
> for the people who spread it. Once a story is marked as disputed, ads
> directing people to that story will not be allowed. We will also work to
> reduce publications masquerading as other publishers from running ads, and
> work to reduce ads that include links to web pages that are mostly ads.
>      *   Supporting informed sharing: We’ve found that if reading an article
> makes people significantly less likely to share it, then it may be a sign
> that a headline and/or story has misled people in some way. We’re going to
> test incorporating this signal into the ranking of news stories,
> specifically for articles that are outliers in that people who read the
> article are significantly less likely to share it.
>
> We work hard to find the right balance between encouraging free expression
> and promoting a safe and welcoming community. This is all a work in
> progress. We'll keep exploring new ways to help the people who use Facebook
> connect meaningfully and build common understanding. We understand how
> important the issue is for our community and we are committed to getting
> this right.
>
> In Kenya, we launched an in-app educational tool in English and Swahili that
> was shown to our users in Kenya which many of you may have seen. These
> notices were placed in newspapers and radio stations as well. We also had an
> in-app educational tool to encourage users to report content that violated
> our Community Standards. We also understand the importance of the role of
> the media to inform our communities. We spent time training journalists in
> Nairobi on how best to use our tools to reach their readers effectively.
> These included Nation Media and the Standard Group.
>
> As many others have also pointed out, we understand the importance of news
> media literacy and are actively working to partner locally and empower
> people to be informed consumers of news. This means that people know the
> right questions to ask and how to vet valid news sources when they are
> consuming the news. We would love to continue having this conversation in
> Kenya and hear where we can support such programs.
>
> We take our responsibility very seriously and are encouraged by the
> conversation happening on this list. We take feedback very seriously and are
> following this discussion intently. Please do reach out to us with any
> questions.
>
>  Best
>
> Fadzai Madzingira | Policy Analyst, Africa
> Africa Solutions Ltd @ Facebook
> (e) fmadzingira at fb.com<mailto:fmadzingira at fb.com>
>
>
>
> From: kictanet <kictanet-bounces+fmadzingira=fb.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke> on
> behalf of Wambui Wambui via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Reply-To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Date: Friday, 18 August 2017 at 14:53
> To: Fadzai Madzingira <fmadzingira at fb.com>
> Cc: Wambui Wambui <wwamunyu2009 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake
> News
>
> This is an interesting discussion even from the perspective of history. When
> technologies are new, the potential to confuse or confound users are well
> documented. One classic example is from radio, when a dramatized fictional
> piece about an invasion from Mars was aired on American radio in the late
> 1930s. Dramatic sound effects and other storytelling techniques via the new
> medium caused widespread panic. Today, audiences have a much greater
> understanding – and appreciation – for radio drama.
>
> There are other examples from other technologies, such as laugh tracks on
> television which sound like audiences laughing at the jokes being said by a
> character. That is essentially ‘fake laughter,’ but is designed to get real
> audiences to laugh along and engage with the characters.
>
> My point is that new technologies enable ‘fake’ activities, but it is users
> who finally attain a literacy concerning those activities and learn how to
> deal with them. The big buzz about fake news has made many people a lot more
> conscious and skeptical of what they consume or pass on via social media and
> other platforms. Various campaigns and organizations are turning fake news
> debunking into a new industry with multiple players reaching out to news
> media and academia to act as collaborative partners.
>
> As an academic, I think part of our job in our training institutions is to
> expose our students to:
>
> -          being more critical/skeptical about what they consume on various
> media
>
> -          being more responsible about what they share/forward in their own
> media networks
>
> -          understanding that ‘media’ no longer means a random big company
> out there with radio, TV, and print outlets. But instead ‘media’ is all
> those, plus we ourselves.
> That said, @Ali makes important points on regulation that I largely agree
> with. But I’d say even as we discuss regulation, there should be a
> discussion about responsibility.
>
> Many media houses subscribe to some form of social responsibility. Before
> calling someone a thief for example, they’ll claim to get the facts and even
> then, refer to the ‘alleged’ crime leaving the justice system to declare
> whether someone is a thief or not. Without those checks, the media would be
> engaging in defamation, which is a legal problem.
>
> Perhaps before moving to add yet more laws and regulations to aspects of
> digital technologies, we should educate users/consumers more about greater
> responsibility in their online activities even as they are informed about
> legal penalties.
>
> Wambui
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet
> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>>
> wrote:
> Indeed, the issue of real-name social media accounts. Personally I support
> such a thing, but I am aware that others do not (i.e. they want to allow
> people to post anonymously in fear of retribution of posting something that
> may be true but critical against someone powerful). There is a balance to be
> struck.
>
> But also, people who repeat/resend/republish should not do so unless they
> know the originator or trust it’s source. Unfortunately consumer education
> on this is very difficult (same for issues around responsible online
> gambling etc) and whilst we should still look at effective ways to do that
> (massive newspaper, TV and radio headlines about the risk of being fined for
> spreading fake news may be effective!!), we may need to look at other
> options too.
>
>
> From: kictanet
> [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane>=huawei.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke>]
> On Behalf Of Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet
> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 3:30 PM
> To: Adam Lane <adam.lane at huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane at huawei.com>>
> Cc: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com<mailto:blongwe at gmail.com>>
>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake
> News
>
> Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake
> identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits;
> people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been
> duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about
> catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals?
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet
> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>>
> wrote:
> I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act there
> should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or
> fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater
> penalty than spreading it).
>
> Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the
> news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and
> this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but
> are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently
> trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an
> unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a
> deterrence would be a good thing.
>
> IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be
> enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but
> harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of
> any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines
> to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).
>
> The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards
> etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large
> numbers.
>
> Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value
> their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly
> forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we
> lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the
> offline world… if we value our reputations?
>
> From: kictanet
> [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane>=huawei.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke>]
> On Behalf Of kanini mutemi via kictanet
> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM
> To: Adam Lane <adam.lane at huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane at huawei.com>>
> Cc: kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi at gmail.com<mailto:kaninimutemi at gmail.com>>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake
> News
>
> I have attached a copy of the Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 published
> on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads:
> 'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data
> or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as
> authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall,
> on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or
> to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.'
> Is there a drawback to this approach? 
>
> --
> Mercy Mutemi.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKNNlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=>
> Twitter:
> http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4-JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=>
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_kictanet_blongwe-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=C5-MaYuO_GDVM8cdS5vi5rUfg8k4IyuAfGdNwPEbiWk&e=>
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for
> people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
> development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKNNlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=>
> Twitter:
> http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4-JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=>
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wwamunyu2009%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_kictanet_wwamunyu2009-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=vX4SFrFYADLwdIRq3RHh9hYflCQr4RxfBeAwlDr3AvI&e=>
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for
> people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
> development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
>

-- 
Francis Monyango

Lawyer | ICT Policy and Legal Consultant
www.monyango.com
0726792792