Jacinda achieves international commitment to social media change

Written By: - Date published: 8:09 am, May 16th, 2019 - 97 comments
Categories: Deep stuff, facebook, International, internet, interweb, jacinda ardern, the praiseworthy and the pitiful, twitter - Tags:

 

Jacinda Ardern has shown true international leadership by achieving considerable international consensus to effecting change in the way that social media operates.  She also persuaded the major tech companies, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and Amazon to sign up to proposals that include updating their terms of use, identifying checks on live streaming, sharing technology development, and collaborating on protocols for responding to crises. The companies also agreed to improve reporting tools for users, and to publish reports on efforts to detect and remove objectionable material.

From Jo Moir at Radio New Zealand:

Tech company and world leaders have signed an unprecedented Christchurch Call agreement to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online.

The meeting, the first of its kind, in Paris overnight saw all of the major technology companies, 17 countries and the European Commission sign up to the call initiated by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron, in the wake of the Christchurch attack that killed 51 people.

The action plan asks tech companies to review the operation of their algorithms that are driving users towards or amplifying terrorist content online and find ways to intervene earlier.

In order to try and prevent an attack like the one at Christchurch ever happening again, tech companies have agreed to share the effects of algorithim secrets with each other.

Ms Ardern has called on them to report progress regularly to governments.

At a news conference, Ms Ardern described the agreement as “day one” in the change the world needed.

“Never before have countries and tech companies come together in the wake of an horrific attack to commit to an action plan that will deliver collaboratively work in new technology built to make our communities ultimately safer.”

And there is to be pressure from business interests to make sure that the social media companies conduct themselves differently.  Again from Radio New Zealand:

New Zealand and global investors worth more than $NZ5 trillion are uniting to put pressure on companies who have signed up to the Christchurch Call.

Launched alongside the summit in Paris overnight, the New Zealand Super Fund has coordinated the investor group, worth more than 15 times the GDP of the New Zealand economy.

The group wants to get Facebook, Twitter and Google – who all have social media platforms – to strengthen controls that will prevent the live streaming and distribution of objectionable content.

They plan to raise concerns with the companies’ board and management on these issues.

The investor group is made up of 55 funds – 27 from New Zealand and 28 from across the globe.

Facebook has already announced changes with a proposal to ban users who breach rules over live streaming and the investment of funds into new video recognition software although to be frank the changes feel half hearted and are clearly not enough.

But there was one entity who did not participate in the summit or the declaration, an entity that also has worrying links to white supremacists.

Again from Radio New Zealand:

The United States has snubbed the Christchurch Call summit by not attending or endorsing the agreement.

In a statement from the White House, a spokesperson said the US stood with the international community in condemning terrorist and violent extremist content online in the strongest terms.

But it said the US was not currently in a position to join the agreement, although it supported its the overall goals.

It cited freedom of expression and freedom of the press as reasons it would not be joining the agreement, and said promoting credible, alternative narratives was the best way to defeat terrorist messaging.

Good work Jacinda.  Not only has she led the country through one of its most tragic and difficult of events but she is achieving real international change.

97 comments on “Jacinda achieves international commitment to social media change ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Cinny 1
    16 May 2019 at 8:11 am

    When a leader gains fame on the world stage then uses it for good in an attempt to stop hate, violence and death.

    Now that's something to be proud of. Well done Jacinda!

    • The Chairman 1.1
      16 May 2019 at 10:46 am

      Any concern with the agenda of the global investors corrupting this attempt to do good, Cinny? And how that may end up looking for Jacinda spearheading this?

  2. Dennis Frank 2
    16 May 2019 at 8:31 am

    The response from the US govt is banal. However, it is indeed consistent with the traditional Hollywood line, so we can interpret it as a liberal/conservative solidarity stand on the basis of the twin principles cited.

    The basic rationale is that only a minority copy the Hollywood line (of promoting mass killing with guns) by going out and doing it in real life. Since there's no public lobby opposing the glorification of gun violence in the media, the establishment wins again.

    Ardern's victory is primarily in public relations, and the fine print will have to be examined, then the extent of compliance by the corporations subsequently, but it is a good example of how international agreements can be forged in prompt response to a dire need – as long as you stop the UN from getting involved!

  3. Mark 3
    16 May 2019 at 8:41 am

    This is all grandstanding and a complete and utter waste of time.

    The sort of pet project that Ardern loves – does not require any hard work or deep thought, unlike economic policy or CGT

    For once I find myself in agreement with the US government.

    • You_Fool 3.1
      16 May 2019 at 8:50 am

      All life is meaningless and we should all give up and never try to do anything…..

      • Mark 3.1.1
        16 May 2019 at 8:53 am

        We should never try to do anything that is a completely pointless.

        If she spent as much time on CGT as she did on this silly exercise, it could have made a difference.

        • mickysavage 3.1.1.1
          16 May 2019 at 9:08 am

          The changes she has forced Facebook to make could stop the live broadcasting of such an event happening again. Hardly completely pointless.

          • jbuknz 3.1.1.1.1
            16 May 2019 at 9:35 am
            1. Since we are talking about what people can receive via their computer it is a small and minor advance and the only meaningful advance would be if ALL material, factual AND fiction was banned from transmission.
          • Siobhan 3.1.1.1.2
            16 May 2019 at 10:45 am

            So, your saying the Christchurch shooter (or ISIS etc etc) wouldn't have live streamed for fear of being.. immediately banned from using Facebook Live for a period of time, such as 30 days. or Purchasing ads.

            ” Facebook did not specify all the rules that it will use to enforce the new one-strike approach, but pointed to current community standards that prohibit spreading terrorist propaganda on the social network. The policy will expand to other topics in the coming weeks”..I bet those terrorists will be quite upset to know they are breaking ‘Community Standards’..maybe we could all defriend them and really put them out.

            Anyway.

            Now, with this stratospheric commitment to International Change, do you think she could actually change a few things around here…

            • Macro 3.1.1.1.2.1
              16 May 2019 at 11:11 am

              Oh! For goodness sake!

              The point of this announcement and the importance of this agreement has obviously gone waaayyy over your head.

              The point of this world wide policy – except for the US and Russia – is to stop tech companies pushing people towards these extremist ideologies on social media sites, where they can become radicalised. If you haven't noticed over recent years there has been a growing element of what is now called white nationalists who are egging each other on towards more and more extreme positions – even to the extent of outright terrorist attacks against innocent people and the promotion of racial war. This has no place anywhere – not even in the US,* which regrettably has a massive number of these extremists who are avid followers of one of the nastiest "presidents" in US history and an avid racist and Islamophobe himself.

              *(or the Philippines for that matter, which I understand is considering removing the websites 4 Chan and 8Chan which are hosted there)

              http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1905/S00079/philippines-considers-action-against-4chan-and-8chan.htm

                • Macro …
                  16 May 2019 at 12:33 pm

                  Trump doesn't think there is a problem because, in fact, he is part of the problem.

              • Siobhan …
                16 May 2019 at 12:30 pm

                Yeah, I get the point..we all hate racists and extremists…congrats, nice layout and punctuation too, but maybe you could take some time to read the thread before commenting…I'm commenting on what will actually happen according to facebooks own statements, in the context of Mickeys claims..ie Facebook to make could stop the live broadcasting of such an event happening again

                Though we could talk about the real point…why are people drawn to this stuff in the first place, why are so many people being forced from their homes and on the move around the planet, war, Globalisation , inequality..etc etc..but that would require something a little bit bigger than soundbites and photo ops, so I guess our middle of the road, ‘positive messaging’ political leaders aren’t going there.

                And if we are looking to the Philippines as a moral example, may I respectfully suggest we are in deep trouble..

                • Macro …
                  16 May 2019 at 12:35 pm

                  Thank you once again for completely missing the point.

                  Mind you I suspected nothing else.

                  • Adrian Thornton …
                    16 May 2019 at 1:08 pm

                    It is Jacinda who is missing the point, instead of trying to address or tackling the root causes of this terrible violence she goes for the low hanging fruit, which will have nearly zero effect on terrorism going forward…but then again that is like all short term thinking centrists, no real vision to solving big problems, just look at her track record at home.

                    BTW in case you didn't know, wide spread global terrorism existed long before the internet.

                    • Macro …
                      16 May 2019 at 1:32 pm

                      Good Grief!

                      For and your lot the answer to everything is "Address Poverty!"

                      Well for your information the Chch terrorist was able to pay his way around the world, buy up expensive guns and ammunition, spend endless hours on the internet watching violent and extremist content, buy expensive kit so he could promulgate his despicable actions, had his own car, and was hardly malnourished.

                      The same could be said of almost all of these idiots who are now so radicalised that they have no idea what they are doing. It has nothing to do with poverty or lack of resources. It has everything to do with a distorted perception of reality fostered by extremist online content.

                    • Mark …
                      16 May 2019 at 3:54 pm

                      There's a word for them…..mensheviks

                  • Adrian Thornton …
                    16 May 2019 at 1:38 pm

                    Um, when did I say "Address Poverty!" exactly, or for that matter mention poverty at all in my comment?

                    You obviously have a lot of preconceived ideas about me, maybe just take the time to actually read my comments before you answer them in future… Good Grief! and “thank you once again for completely missing the point.’

            • Ken 3.1.1.1.2.2
              16 May 2019 at 7:20 pm

              The cannabis laws would be a great start.

          • infused 3.1.1.1.3
            16 May 2019 at 1:31 pm

            The changes didn't force Facebook to do shit.

            1. It's non-binding

            2. They were already working on it

            3. They locked the media out of the room once the discussion began.

          • Nick 3.1.1.1.4
            16 May 2019 at 7:26 pm

            Totally agree Micky. If it slows down the spread of hate and violence, it's achieving something. Although I guess Mark has the solution for CGT, so that too is something.

        • Clive Macann 3.1.1.2
          16 May 2019 at 9:09 am

          I'm only guessing here that you wanted CGT implemented to give Simon and his followers a weapon to fight with in the next election.

    • CC 3.2
      16 May 2019 at 8:59 am

      Says it all Mark – to hell with aspiration and international co-operation, better to throw your lot in with the US Government whose commitment to freedom of speech is exemplified by torturing and imprisoning those who expose their war crimes and has no qualms about running interference for white supremacists, fascists and neo-nazis. Get a grip!

    • Anne 3.3
      16 May 2019 at 10:10 am

      For once I find myself in agreement with the US government.

      A closet white supremacist in our midst. Why am I not surprised?

      • Mark 3.3.1
        16 May 2019 at 11:15 am

        For heavens sake, how on earth is saying that Ardern is completely wasting her time on these sorts of stupid photo opportunity meaningless stunts got anything to do with white supremacy? And I'm not white

        Ardern should get the fuck back here, build some fucken houses. That she surrendered without firing a shot on CGT demonstrates she does not like the difficult battles, just the easy meaningless ones that give her a chance of overseas travel and a chance to grandstand and virtue signal.

        • Adrian Thornton 3.3.1.1
          16 May 2019 at 12:41 pm

          @ Mark, Exactly right, but what else would you expect from this bunch of spineless centrists.

        • Anne 3.3.1.2
          16 May 2019 at 1:03 pm

          Anyone who is "in agreement with the US government" is condoning a government who practice racism and misogynism of the grossest kind.

          The so-called "freedom of speech" crap is just a convenient cover for a fascist regime who are, in practice, doing the opposite – ie. taking away the freedoms and rights of their people and in particular ethnic groupings because of where they came from and the colour of their skins.

          I gather you have forgotten why this international forum was convened. Two months ago a right wing, white fascist individual gunned down and killed 51 innocent people and injured 47 more – many of those injured will never fully recover.

          And you don't believe that is a good enough reason for countries to assemble and nut out a post-ChCh plan to stop these vile individuals from carrying out their atrocities wherever they may occur?

          I call you our for being a hypocrite. Hence the statement.

          It had the desired effect. 🙂

          • RedLogix 3.3.1.2.1
            16 May 2019 at 1:45 pm

            I'd suggest having a quick revision of the definition of fascism and then let us know whether you think it currently applies more to Trump's USA or Xinping's China.

            characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

            • Macro 3.3.1.2.1.1
              16 May 2019 at 2:09 pm

              Red – these sick individuals identify with Nazi ideology. They festoon their guns and everything around them with Nazi symbols. I think you are just splitting hairs here for the sake of argument.

              And yes! Trump and his cohorts are actively practicing "racism and misogynism of the grossest kind."

              But nowhere did Anne identify the US as a facist country – but she did correctly imply that there is a significant group within the US, and elsewhere, who identify strongly with the most evil aspects of Nazi Germany.

              • RedLogix …
                16 May 2019 at 2:48 pm

                Where Anne said "The so-called "freedom of speech" crap is just a convenient cover for a fascist regime" …. with clear reference to the USA.

                As for 'white supremacists' … well I may circulate among all the wrong people, but it's my impression that the actual number of neo-Nazi's in this country is still miniscule. Of course what the far left usually does is take these 'ist words and extend them so as to include anyone who says something they disagree with; so the definitions get stretchy real fast.

                I'd agree they have some political significance especially in Europe where their numbers are definitely increasing in reaction to the unconstrained immigration they're experiencing. But distinguishing between swastika waving genocidal nutters, and people anxious when they see their ancestoral homelands 'swamped by outsiders' … is probably a nuance too far to be talking about at the moment.

                • Anne …
                  16 May 2019 at 3:31 pm

                  Redlogix:

                  If you truly believe the Trump regime (yes, thank-you Macro. I'm talking about the regime in power, not the rest of America for whom I feel huge empathy) has stayed away from the Paris forum over concerns about freedom of speech then I am indeed very surprised. He is an incompetent, pathological lying creep with the emotional intelligence of a four year old. I would go so far as to say he would round up all his critics and have them shot if he thought he could get away with it.

                  What's the bet he and his cohorts are throwing their toys out of the cot because a young, attractive and highly intelligent woman is holding the world's centre stage instead of him.

                  As for the white supremacist comment. It was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek but there's no emoticon for 'tongue in cheek'.

                • Mark …
                  16 May 2019 at 3:48 pm

                  Hang on, hang on. I'm all for really taking on right wing neo-nazis and extirpating them root and branch.

                  However, I think this attack on social media is an ineffective meaningless diversion that will do nothing to stop terrorism and extremism of any kind. Its the sort of crap that Ardern loves to indulge in rather than really getting to grips with real issues —like kiwibuild and CGT (her surrender on that was a fucken disgrace…one of the worst political betrayals in NZ political history). Its more about her her and only her. She's an attention hog.

                  ” and people anxious when they see their ancestoral homelands ‘swamped by outsiders'”

                  FFS….that's fucken rich……you have more anglo saxon derived peoples like several hundred million living outside their 'ancestral homelands' in other peoples 'ancestral homelands, than perhaps any other group in the world. Would apply to a whole lot of other European people as well …..there are around 50 million descendants of Germans for example in the USA alone, plus millions in South America. And one could go on and on and on.

                  And many of the non-whites in Europe come from the former empires or even current territories of those European countries.

                  Stop justifying alt-right fascist bs

                    • Mark …
                      16 May 2019 at 4:42 pm

                      Yeah….approx 50 million chinese living outside of China…

                      About 510,000,000 white people living outside of Europe.
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emigration

                      "numbers are of the essence"....as Mr Enoch Powell once said (someone who I guess you have a lot of time for).

                    • RedLogix …
                      16 May 2019 at 5:29 pm

                      And I recall you being very hot about the British impact on China in the 1700's and 1800's.

                      My point is simple; you stink of 'Middle Kingdom' Han superiority that's no different to when it's done by white people, or any other culture.

                    • Mark …
                      16 May 2019 at 6:21 pm

                      "And I recall you being very hot about the British impact on China in the 1700's and 1800's."

                      Not sure what you are on about. Don't see Chinese troops running rampant through Europe, Buckingham Palance has not been burned to the ground by the PLA, the PRC has not forced at gunpoint the legalization of hard drugs throughout Europe thereby getting untold millions hooked and immiserating the people there, and China has not carved out huge chunks of territory from Europe that flies under the 5 star red flag of the PRC.

                    • RedLogix …
                      16 May 2019 at 6:56 pm

                      Not sure what you are on about.

                      Yes you are. It's this insane pretense that the Chinese are a morally superior people with only benign intentions; yet somehow:

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_wars_and_battles

                      Nah … if perchance history had been different and the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions had first occurred in China instead of the West, it would have been Chinese Imperialists colonising the world.

                    • Mark …
                      17 May 2019 at 2:50 am

                      <i>if perchance history had been different and the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions had first occurred in China instead of the West, it would have been Chinese Imperialists colonising the world. </i>

                      That's just a lazy assumption. Heard of a guy call Zheng He? Google him.

                      Anyway. Back to original point.

                      It is rank hypocrisy to bemoan the fact that there are a few non-whites in Europe, when there are 500 fucken million whites all over the rest of the world.

                      Sorry, if you spread round the world, displacing and exploiting other people, don't be surprised that you find a few of them popping up in your traditional spaces as well.

                    • RedLogix …
                      17 May 2019 at 5:33 am

                      It is rank hypocrisy to bemoan the fact that there are a few non-whites in Europe

                      I wasn't bemoaning it; merely pointing out that Europeans are like humans everywhere and at least some fraction of the population will react negatively to outsiders arriving in town; just as you and many Chinese still greatly resent the historic British imperial presence in China.

                      https://jakubmarian.com/immigration-in-europe-map-of-the-percentage-and-country-of-origin-of-immigrants/

                      Besides, China doesn't have history. Your hero's Red Guards erased it all during the Cultural Revolution … remember?

                    • Mark …
                      17 May 2019 at 9:47 am

                      That link you provide shows most of the migration is internal —i.e. a consequence of freedom of movement within the EU.

                      To draw an analogy between this and migration from mainly former territories of empire on the one hand, and what the British did to China on the other hand is simply fucking absurd.

                      What the British did to China in the 1900s is the equivalent of the WWII German invasions of Eastern European countries and their looting.

            • Mark 3.3.1.2.1.2
              16 May 2019 at 3:59 pm

              that's an easy one….the USA is fascist.

              The USA is a far more regimented society than China….anyone who has visited both places can see that. There is far more real freedom of speech in China, and furthermore the USA has about 7 or 8 times the number of people in prison, many for very very minor crimes, than China.

              Also on the international scene, we recently had over 130 countries round the world who attended the recent belt and road summit.

              https://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciagarciaherrero/2019/05/09/is-the-u-s-panicking-at-chinas-big-hedge/#582f95daccb

              They were there not at gunpoint, not because their countries had the shit bombed out of them, but for a win-win cooperation to develop in a very real sense poor countries all round the world, to create a world where it is not just a few white and wealthy few who enjoy 99% of God's good creation at the expense of everyone else.

              • Anne …
                16 May 2019 at 4:12 pm

                @ Mark

                I owe you an apology. My "white supremicist" comment was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek, but you're not the "Mark" I thought I was responding to.

                There's a nasty piece of right-wing work also called 'Mark' who has commented here in the past, but you are obviously not him.

                I don't agree with Jacinda's trip to the Paris forum being just a talk fest though, and I think time will prove as much.

                • Mark …
                  16 May 2019 at 4:22 pm

                  hahahahahah…..no probs

                  Looks like we agree on neo-nazis and alt-right scum, but disagree on Jacinda!

      • James 3.3.2
        16 May 2019 at 12:42 pm

        what a disgusting comment Anne.

        Weaponizing terms like that is not right.

        Why am I not surprised it was you – you seem to be more hateful in some of your comments.

    • North 3.4
      17 May 2019 at 1:11 pm

      Mark…..would that be grandstanding in the vein of John Key's giggling, globally broadcast caution that the murderer/child molester/escapee to South America, Phillip Smith, was someone whom proper folks really should not invite to lunch ?

      There's been a fairly positive international response to Ardern generally and to initiative specifically. However you slice it that is hardly a bad thing. From you ?…..sour grapes. Munch on and grimace Mark.

  4. The Chairman 4
    16 May 2019 at 9:01 am

    New Zealand and global investors worth more than $NZ5 trillion are uniting to put pressure on companies who have signed up to the Christchurch Call.

    Is that so when a protest (say against a mining company for example) is being live streamed, it will now be shut down as hate speech against the company?

  5. Dennis Frank 5
    16 May 2019 at 9:23 am

    There's a leftist idealist response worth considering: https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/16-05-2019/the-christchurch-call-is-a-small-welcome-step-heres-what-needs-to-come-next/

    "Trying to eliminate the spread of terror online without addressing the underlying drivers of that spread is like trying to stop ocean acidification without addressing the drivers of climate change."

    Seems a reasonable analogy, but, as with all leftist idealism, her analysis contains flaws due to assuming people can be made to conform to the leftist idealist prescription. Such conformity has merit sometimes, but not when contradicted by human nature.

    "Our research found that the harm done to people and democracy by digital media is driven not only by the behaviour of a few bad actors using these platforms, but by the unintended effects of the underlying business model of the attention economy, the monopolistic power of a handful of companies and the opaqueness of their practices."

    "In particular, the algorithms that are the engines of these platforms are using an unprecedented amount of data to control the flow of information to citizens, without any transparency or accountability around how they work and the harm they may be doing to democracy. If we want to reduce the harm done by social media in any meaningful and sustainable way, we have to address those root causes."

    Is "the attention economy" even a thing?? I suspect it is merely a euphenism for the media. And the largest media corporations have been produced by market forces, according to the law of supply and demand, by giving the people what they want. Being a leftist, she naturally doesn't want to admit that reality. According to the latest stat, 87% of kiwis are on Facebook. The masses love drivel, so capitalists get rich by providing it, as per normal.

    So the root causes she complains about are human desires, and their provision via technology. Notice how she carefully avoids the social engineering implication of trying to suppress those desires. She doesn't even try to explain how technology can be applied better. Leftist complaints about human nature are perennial, but to be more than futile they must supply workable solutions as well. Transcending the impotent protest stance is essential for leftist thinkers…

    • Macro 5.1
      16 May 2019 at 11:33 am

      Are you completely bereft of any understanding of the role that social media now plays in the increasing radicalisation of some sectors of society, not only in the western countries, but world wide. None of this, whether from the extreme right, or the extreme left, is helpful or conducive to fostering good societies and interpersonal relationships. There is an urgent need to tackle this problem, and this is the first, and perhaps tiny step in the beginning of a world wide movement towards regulating what has become the wild west of the internet. Today one of the most followed people on the promotion of extremist content on youtube is a 14 year old girl. You cannot tell me that this is good.

      https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/youtubes-newest-far-right-foul-mouthed-red-pilling-star-is

      • Dennis Frank 5.1.1
        16 May 2019 at 12:23 pm

        I do agree that social media is fueling the development of subcultures. As a lifelong radical, I don't share your view that radicalisation is bad. If mainstreamers had followed radicals into the counterculture in the early seventies, the Green movement would have displaced the dinosaur parties in the eighties, neoliberalism would have seemed so antiquated as to be still-born on intro, failing to achieve traction, and we'd live in a world in which climate change would have been prevented via the precautionary principle.

        But I probably would agree with you in your choice of specifying some radical subcultures as sociopathic. So my comment focused on the leftist tendency to complain about the problem instead of becoming proactive in the attempt to solve it. Note that the PM has been doing the latter. Not all leftists are perennial complainers – some are problem-solvers. I respect that latter group, not the former.

    • Sacha 5.2
      16 May 2019 at 1:30 pm

      'Is "the attention economy" even a thing?'

      Yes. And I trust the researcher you are criticising more than you about the overall topic, including models and practicalities of social change (which she has worked on over the last two decades).

  6. higherstandard 6
    16 May 2019 at 9:28 am

    My lovely soundbites…..smile and wave boys …smile and wave.

  7. The Chairman 7
    16 May 2019 at 10:26 am

    I've received piles of feedback saying good on her, but she should be at home sorting out New Zealand, before sorting out the world's social media – Duncan Garner

    Duncan Garner warning Jacinda to take heed of public feedback.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/duncan-garner-christchurch-call-a-win-but-losses-at-home-mount-for-jacinda-ardern.html

    • Dennis Frank 7.1
      16 May 2019 at 12:30 pm

      Technically correct, but short-sighted. A competent political leader can do both simultaneously. Perception amongst those emailers probably is driven by the relative failure of her team to produce a perception of competent governance thus far. She ought to focus a little more on managing her team, true, but the world easily turns to shit in the absence of top-level leadership, as we keep seeing, so doing that global thing is essential.

      • Kat 7.1.1
        16 May 2019 at 2:35 pm

        Thoughtful comments Dennis. There are those among us that seem to ignore the reality that the terror attack occurred at home, in New Zealand. Jacinda's 'Christchurch Call' is also about not letting the memory of that heinous crime just fade away into the grim events, best forgotten, sections of history.

        Perception may be reality to many, so is the reality that Jacinda is leading a real coalition govt in an MMP environment that the majority of people voted for. Her 'team' is not NZ First or the Greens. The result of the 2020 election will be crucial. If she manages to attract enough votes for her 'team' to secure overwhelming control in any future coalition then the perception of 'competent governance' may prevail. As a famous composer once wrote "the best is yet to come".

        • Dennis Frank 7.1.1.1
          16 May 2019 at 2:51 pm

          Let's hope so Kat. I admire your optimism, share it somewhat but am concerned at the dodgy Labour team performance thus far, and even more concerned about the consequences of Winston's apparent shift into being the dog-wagging tail.

          Almost as if he's gone into campaign mode prematurely. The NZF stance recently has seemed too partisan-conservative to be helping the coalition's credibility. I didn't mind them being sensible centrists as long as they were visibly team-players. If he doesn't realise that's still required to keep the coalition viable as a concept in the public mind, there's a risk of not winning re-election next year despite the PM doing so well.

          • Kat 7.1.1.1.1
            16 May 2019 at 3:42 pm

            Agree the Labour team's performance has been a bit dodgy but then politics and politicians have been dodgy for some time, including a very dodgy previous nine years of a National govt. There is no hiding from the reality that Jacinda came to the role of PM by an extraordinary route. This first term is a reflection of those highly unusual series of events surrounding the Labour leadership preceding the election in 2017. Lets face it if they hadn't of happened Bill English would be PM. For that alone I am prepared to give Winston some time in the sun.

            Jacinda's strong performance should hopefully secure a bigger mandate for her team in 2020. That would mean a smaller opposition and a more manageable coalition. If that happens the PM’s performance should be even stronger from coming through her baptism of fire (or constant projectile crap as a friend of mine commented recently).

      • The Chairman 7.1.2
        17 May 2019 at 11:04 am

        Whether true or not, there seems to be a perception that she is conveniently using this as cover and a distraction from facing the growing troubles at home.

        • Dennis Frank 7.1.2.1
          17 May 2019 at 11:35 am

          A perception emanating from the desperation of the Nats, eh? Fed by Labour ministerial incompetence. Politics as usual, in other words.

          Now if the massacre had not been live-streamed, the need to insulate the masses from real life would not have become evident, right? Bread & circuses would still suffice, as per the old Roman dictum.

          Nobody would ever accuse National politicians of statesmanship. I bet they don't even know what it is. So when they see Ardern providing it they understandably misinterpret what they see.

    • Cinny 7.2
      16 May 2019 at 12:42 pm

      garner may have forgotten we are all humans and citizens of planet earth.

      Meanwhile richardson is keen on being a nat in parliament.

      I wonder what their agenda is with their narrative lololollz

    • Sacha 7.3
      16 May 2019 at 1:33 pm

      New Zealanders use global social media platforms and the only place to change them is exactly where our PM and other local leaders have gone. Garner is a braying dunce.

  8. Mark 8
    16 May 2019 at 11:22 am

    So if I post a video of a walk-through of Call of Duty or some other third person shooter online, that will be banned???????

  9. The Chairman 9
    16 May 2019 at 11:50 am

    Did anybody else find it interesting China wasn't on the list of signatories? Controlling the internet is their forte.

    • The Chairman 9.1
      16 May 2019 at 12:07 pm

      Was it thought China taking part to soon may startle the horses?

      • Dennis Frank 9.1.1
        16 May 2019 at 12:35 pm

        To preserve the illusion that it is competent at top-level geopolitics, China must refrain from being a team-player. Same principle of psychology that drives Paula B to refrain from debating Chloe S. A princess on the same level as a commoner? Get real. So China, above the fray, competes with the USA for the role of global controller. Traditional imperial policy.

        • The Chairman 9.1.1.1
          16 May 2019 at 5:26 pm

          Yet, when asked about China not taking part, Ardern said she expected that to change over time.

          • Dennis Frank 9.1.1.1.1
            16 May 2019 at 5:29 pm

            There's always a place in politics for naive optimism. 😉

            • The Chairman 9.1.1.1.1.1
              17 May 2019 at 10:47 am

              Naive optimism or perhaps she just has better insight into China's intentions than you.wink

  11. Augustus 11
    16 May 2019 at 12:50 pm

    So 'Global Investors' are putting pressure on social media to suppress 'objectionable content'. What could go wrong?

    No argument that live streaming massacres is objectionable, but the trouble is there is almost nothing out there that is not objectionable to someone. So who gets to define 'objectionable'? I have no doubt that streaming rugby matches for which a 'global investor' holds broadcasting rights is highly objectionable to them. That doesn't make rugby objectionable though. Is war footage objectionable? Depends, but who decides?

    I fear we could end up with an internet akin to our health and safety regulations, where everyone gets treated like a primary school pupil by default.

    • Dennis Frank 11.1
      16 May 2019 at 5:46 pm

      I suspect you got no response to the `who decides' question because nobody knows. You may have intended it to be rhetorical, but I'll have a go at an answer anyway.

      Media owners have the right to decide the messaging they use. Governments can provide rules, but then enforcement must proceed via the courts, which costs everyone involved time & money. Guidelines are more likely. Although the notion of industry self-regulation has been widely discredited, it is still the likeliest option to be used. Failure will then compel eventual legislation.

      So Facebook, etc, will allocate managers to do the job of quality control of the messaging. Best people to hire will be those with expertise in distinguishing between political messaging and advocacy of violence. Lawyers are likely to be applied either directly or via supervision of outcomes.

      A public reporting channel is essential to crowd-source identification of problem messaging fast, but that runs into another qc problem: to err is human. As for the 111 police emergency number, the masses are prone to clog up the system with false messages.

  12. Stuart Munro. 12
    16 May 2019 at 1:10 pm

    Well I'm not sure it amounts to much, personally.

    I've seen nothing to indicate the Chch shooter was radicalized by violent content on Facebook, it seems to have had more to do with the Chan websites.

    Is anyone going after the Chans? If not, why not?

    • patricia bremner 12.1
      16 May 2019 at 5:52 pm

      Because the country where they began is. Keep up.

    • Macro 12.2
      16 May 2019 at 5:59 pm

      Philippines considers action against 4chan and 8chan

      http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1905/S00079/philippines-considers-action-against-4chan-and-8chan.htm

      Faysaleyyah Abdullah, from the Philippines National Defence Department, said there was a growing consensus that public-private partnerships were needed to address extremists' use of the forums to share disturbing content.

      "We continue to monitor these websites [4chan and 8chan] but as to whether those websites are actually taken down, that is why we want to enhance legislation – it is currently being reviewed.

      "But whether it has any results on the use of social media remains to be seen."

      Counterterrorist authorities had been raising concerns for some time about how Facebook was being used as a platform for radicalisation and reinvestment, she said.

      • Stuart Munro. 12.2.1
        16 May 2019 at 8:08 pm

        That much is promising. I guess the other logical thing to go after are the Tor based sites, some of which are dark web, for which JA's call, that SMPs don't want to host this crap may not be true.

        • Macro 12.2.1.1
          16 May 2019 at 9:06 pm

          The thing that I see is that the Tech Cos also recognise that there is a problem. After all, they depend on their revenue, not so much from uses, but from advertisers and there is $15Trillion of Companies saying they have to get their act together. So there is some incentive there. So Facebook etc are going to head off and work on their algorithms and, by all accounts, share their progress across platforms. They will also report back with progress to Govts who can if necessary implement regulations etc. This was a first step in the right direction, and we hope that it will see a reduction for instance in 14 year old girls being radicalised – such as exampled here:

          https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/youtubes-newest-far-right-foul-mouthed-red-pilling-star-is

          • Stuart Munro. 12.2.1.1.1
            16 May 2019 at 9:13 pm

            Well at that level then it is indeed a healthy first step. I still feel though, that the US is MIA on this. It's like the internet is US soil when they want to get a Dotcom or an Assange, but terra nullius when it's dodgy stuff they like.

            Jesus what a link 🙁

            • Macro 12.2.1.1.1.1
              16 May 2019 at 9:53 pm

              Yeah the omission of the US is a serious issue – that doesn't mean though that there are many in the US who don’t see this as important. An excellent article on the matter is here:

              https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/15/18625059/christchurch-call-white-house-jacinda-ardern-shooting

              The problem is of course – as always – Trump. He doesn't see that there a problem – mainly because he is part of the problem! And of course – Freedom of Speech!

              If, and when, the man is booted out I think we will see a different approach from the replacement administration. For instance, almost all of the 21 Democrat candidates are touting gun reform, The women's movement had a huge influence in the mid- terms, and they are not resting on their laurels. Expect an even greater blue wave in 2020. Many of the Repugnants in the Senate are up for re-election in 2020, so it could well be a Democrat controlled House and Senate – and if that is the case then we should really see some progressive change for the better.

    • WeTheBleeple 12.3
      18 May 2019 at 6:38 am

      Facebook is a gateway drug to Chan et al. You go there to hook up with friends and then the algorithms have you in their grasp. Any tendency to extremity will be filtered and funneled to the appropriate assholes.

      People who don't like feedback just unfriend the critics and befriend the mirrors till their own little echo chambers are formed.

      Facebook is a fucking HUGE problem.

  13. Fireblade 13
    17 May 2019 at 10:09 am

    A fine example of real leadership by our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

    Meanwhile,

    Simon and the National Party were focused on Slushies, Gummy Bears and answering to the Serious Fraud Office.