Dr. Elena Abrusci, Senior Lecturer in Law at Brunel University London, published a detailed submission to the Innovation and Technology Committee, titled "The Legacy of Misinformation and Disinformation: Afragmented Solution?" In December 2024, this document addresses the persistent challenges in mitigating social media misinformation and disinformation. Based on her expertise in law, Abrusci submits evidence suggesting that the UK’s regulatory and legislative framework remains largely ineffective in addressing policy responses to harmful content on social media.
The Roots of Misinformation
The first key issue explored in Abrusci’s submission is the historical persistence of misinformation and disinformation. Over centuries, these phenomena have been marshaled against civil society, political institutions, and the state. Fromposed by ancient authorities and exploited by pseudo-罚-coercing entities, misinformation has long been a potent tool of repression. However, despite centuries of efforts, humanity has failed to address the full scale of these issues. This underscores the need for innovative strategies to combat misinformation.
The Rise of Generative AI and Its Negative Consequences
A significant new dimension to the submission is the rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI), which is increasing the number of misinformationous content created on social platforms. Dr. Abrusci discusses how AI-driven tools, such as Generative AI (GA) and聊天 agents, are not only generating increasingly sophisticated misinformation but also reshaping the audience’s perceptions of safe and harmful content. Understanding the harm caused by this new generation of AIMoon rises is crucial, as it extends beyond merely diagnosing AI behavior to recognizing the socio-economic and cultural implications of misinformation.
The Deficit in UK’s Online Safety Act
The second critical issue involves the UK’s Online Safety Act, a proposed legislation aimed at protecting the fatality of online misinformation. However, Abrusci’s submission highlights several flaws in the act. For one, the framework does not ensure an inclusive approach to preventing harm, failing to balance free expression with the protection of user rights. Additionally, the act’s vague definitions limit its capacity to enforce strict measures, creating inconsistencies that could lead to unintended overreach. The clause also lacks sufficient enforcement powers, particularly for everyday users, exacerbating existing inequalities in access to safe online spaces.
Over emphasizing public discourse and need for institutional oversight
The submission also identifies that effective responses to online misinformation require greater than merely technological regulation—variables at the institutional and individual levels must be addressed. They must involve diverse stakeholders, including the Electoral Commission, Advertising Standards Authority, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and potentially other parties that hold users or service providers accountable for the impact of their actions. This interdependencies requirement makes multifaceted regulatory and policy frameworks essential.
Addressing Misinformation Through Interdisciplinary Collaboration
Three specific recommendations are discussed in the submission. First, a comprehensive and foundational regulatory framework for online governance would need to be developed, ensuring that it is neither siloed nor simply a compiled collection of disparate pieces of policy. Second, new measures of regulation could easily rise from more granular and context-aware technologies, such as behavioral or contextual analytics. A third key step is to address the under-covered challenge of(truthful information) Assist mechanisms, such as a more rnn valuable likelihood estimate, to allow users to manage their narrative uses of information.
The Need for Redefining the Framework and Reducing Enforcement Powers
Finally, Abrusci advises that regulatory and policy frameworks should be reaffirmed beyond Ofcom, a key regulatory body in the sector. Exclusively relying on Ofcom’s current functions may leave the UK in a weaker position than needed to build a robust online safety framework. In light of this, the proposal is to introduce new measures, such as a majority-body election system for regulatory机构 candidates, to ensure that top officials are elected with accountability. The submission also suggests reconsidering the role of Ofcom, emphasizing its importance beyond oversight of its citizens.
Future Horizons: A F Maxwell
In conclusion, the submission underscores the enduring challenge of combating misinformation and highlights the need for a coordinated effort involving multiple stakeholders. While progress can be made, particularly through the development of comprehensive frameworks and increased institutional oversight, it remains a complex task involving both innovation and careful regulation. Addressing misinformation will require not only technological and policy changes but also a sustained, long-term commitment to improving the system as a whole. Over time, with collaboration and collective action, the UK and the global community can work together to build a more robust online space where free expression can flourish, while safeguarding against the dangers of misinformation and disinformation.