certain people from spreading rumours, but it also prevents everyone else from seeking, receiving and imparting information and prevents authorities using it to disseminate factual information, counter rumours and appeal for calm. This may set a worrying precedent for blocking websites in the future that the government simply does not like. It is important that processes are put in place that make clear under what circumstances websites can be blocked, and how a request is made to an ISP. Requests to block from the Government of Myanmar should be made in writing; be accompanied by a court order/judicial authorisation that sets out the legal justification for the request and be time-bound.ISPs must check that requests are made in accordance with the law, and have the opportunity to clarify or request further information if needed. ‘Over the Top’ Services    Put in place processes to deal with requests from Government and users: It is unlikely that an over the top company, such as social media sites, search engines, and blogging platforms, will be notified of or involved in a decision by the Government to cut off access to their whole service, as in the case of ISPs. They are more likely to receive requests from governments or users to remove particular pieces of offending content. Companies usually take the decision to remove content based on their own Community Standards or Terms and Conditions, which often set out what can and cannot be said on their platforms. Freedom of expression may be adversely impacted if the company’s standards are not aligned with international human rights law and/or it does not properly assess the human rights impacts of the takedown request from the government or users. An example is removing content that merely expresses ideas and opinions the Government or others object to but that does not fall into a category of speech that can legitimately be restricted. However, content that falls into the category of incitement can, and should be, blocked. Make Terms of Service accessible: As most over the top companies set their own policies about which content can and cannot be posted, it is important that these Terms of Service are aligned with international human rights standards. Users then need to be aware what content is permissible on certain online services. ‘Hate speech’ is a relatively new concept in Myanmar and what users consider to be hate speech may differ from person to person. For example, during field research on the ground in Myanmar, some people considered swear words or general insults to be hate speech. It is important that a company’s terms of service are translated into Burmese and ideally other ethnic languages, none of which are formally covered by major social media platforms. However users may use either non-Myanmar languages or transliterated forms of Myanmar ethnic minority languages. The company therefore risks hosting hate speech in any of those languages. This is an area where companies need to build up their capability to be able to screen and manage content in all languages on their sites. Develop and promote reporting mechanisms: Most online platforms have a mechanism for users to report content that is illegal, or falls under categories that the company would remove as it contravenes their terms of service, such as a user receiving abuse. As social media companies do not actively monitor all the content posted on their platform, the reporting process is important. It is unlikely the company would see this content otherwise. It also helps the company ‘take the temperature’ of societal attitudes and understand the context in which they are working. One of the ways in which the spread and impact of hate speech can be reduced is through a wellfunctioning mechanism of reporting such speech to the company hosting it, followed by a swift process of removing it from the site. This depends on (as noted above), CHAPTER 4.2: HATE SPEECH 149 4 4.2