Previous 22 / 63 Next

China ARTICLE 19 • Platforms are specifically prohibited from transmitting content in the ‘illegal’ category and must prevent and avoid negative content on certain key parts of their platforms. They must also align personalisation algorithms with the content requirements, take action to ensure appropriate use by minors, and strengthen the inspection of advertising.57 More generally, they must establish rules and systems governing the online content ecosystem, such as systems to register users and review comments.58 They must also meet certain governance requirements.59 • Regulation of Recommendation Algorithms: This 2022 regulation imposes a range of requirements related to recommendation algorithms, such as those used on social media platforms.60 It requires recommendation algorithms to ‘align with mainstream values’ and ‘promote positive and uplifting activity’ by users. Service providers may be classified as having ‘public opinion properties or capacity for social mobilisation’. Such companies must provide details to authorities about their algorithms. Based on this regulation, China has compelled major companies to share algorithm data and has established a new algorithm registry. The public version of this registry contains minimal information and provides little insight into companies’ actual recommender systems, but it is likely that authorities have access to far more detailed data.61 • Provisions on the Management of Internet Post Comments Services 2022: Under these provisions, providers of internet services which enable public commenting or reacting must conduct real-name verification of registered accounts, review any comments for news information before posting, develop systems for managing illegal and negative information, appoint an editorial team to review comments, moderate comments according to user agreements, take action against illegal and negative comments, develop user assessments, and maintain a blacklist of untrustworthy users.62 • Provisions on the Management of Internet User Account Information 2022: Over the years, China has imposed various real-identification verification requirements for using online services. These provisions, the most recent iteration, require companies providing ____________________________________________ 57 China Law Translate, Provisions on the Governance of the Online Information Content Ecosystem, Articles 12–14. 58 China Law Translate, Provisions on the Governance of the Online Information Content Ecosystem, Article 9. 59 China Law Translate, Provisions on the Governance of the Online Information Content Ecosystem, Articles 15–17. 60 R. Creemers, G. Webster, and H. Toner, Translation: Internet Information Service Algorithmic Recommendation Management Provisions – Effective March 1, 2022, unofficial English translation, DigiChina, 10 January 2022; for another version, see China Law Translate, Provisions on the Management of Algorithmic Recommendations in Internet Information Services, 4 January 2022. 61 A. Liang, Chinese Internet Giants Hand Algorithm Data to Government, BBC, 16 August 2022; M. Sheehan and S. Du, What China’s Algorithm Registry Reveals about AI Governance, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 9 December 2022. 62 China Law Translate, Provisions on the Management of Internet Post Comments Services, unofficial English translation, 17 November 2022. 22

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Engaging tech for internet freedom in authoritarian countries

Report

Preview

Language

English

Topic

Information Operation
Internet Restrictions

Author(s)

Article 19

Date Published: Oct 5, 2024

Abstract: In this report, ARTICLE 19 reviews the human rights context and responsibilities of tech companies operating in 3 authoritarian countries in Asia, namely China, Myanmar, and Vietnam. It focuses on the rights to freedom of expression and privacy, and the manner in which authoritarian states directly or indirectly expect companies to assist them in censoring content, promoting propaganda, accessing user data, and engaging in surveillance. While these are undoubtedly highly challenging contexts, companies have not sufficiently prioritised protecting human rights in their policies and actions. States are the primary duty bearers under international human rights law, but companies also have human rights responsibilities, as outlined in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Even if domestic law or circumstances make it impossible for companies to fully meet their human rights responsibilities, they should take action so as to respect human rights standards to the greatest extent possible. Tech companies should not merely reference local law as an excuse for collaborating in rights violations. They should take steps such as those detailed in this report, like adopting appropriate policies, asking governments to justify content removal requests clearly and specifically, and reporting transparently on their compliance with government demands. For each country, we survey the country context and provide an overview of legal obligations which companies operate under that are problematic from the perspective of international human rights law and that may, as a result, put pressure on companies to become complicit in violations of the rights to freedom of expression and privacy. We then explore how Western tech companies operating in these countries, many of which have explicitly stated their commitment to respecting freedom of expression and privacy, have responded to these legal obligations and to other government expectations that they will cooperate in violations of these rights.

Link: source

Primary Documents

ETIF-Thematic-Report-12Sep-24.pdf
English
Download View

Myanmar Internet Project

Select target paragraph3

Engaging tech for internet freedom in authoritarian countries

Primary Documents

Notifications