Ofcom to get powers to stop social media firms being 'judge and jury' on controversial political comment

Ofcom is to get powers to prevent social media firms being "judge and jury" by arbitrarily removing political commentary.

The new online harms watchdog will be able to intervene to get tech giants to reinstate content of “democratic importance” and to protect "freedom of expression".

The move will be part of the Government’s new duty of care bill to be announced this week by Boris Johnson in the Queen’s Speech.

It comes ahead of the imminent appointment of a new chair of Ofcom where former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre is frontrunner in a race with former Conservative culture minister Lord (Ed) Vaizey and the police watchdog Sir Tom Winsor.

The bill will hand Ofcom the task of reining in the social media giants including Facebook, Google and YouTube and grant it powers to levy multi-billion pound fines for the worst breaches of duty of care laws aimed at protecting children from online harms such as sexual abuse and self-harm.

The new legal framework will also aim to “enhance” users’ rights to freedom of expression, access to journalistic content and material of “democratic importance.”

“We are including measures so that social media companies won’t be able to arbitrarily remove content that isn’t high-risk, illegal material. It puts more emphasis on making sure that they are not being judge and jury on content,” said a source.

“The regulator will have powers to guard against the removal of content on free speech grounds. They would be able to intervene and tell a company that they are not being consistent with their own terms and conditions.”

Examples include a YouTube ban on Talk Radio over its controversial presenters Julia Hartley-Brewer, a Brexiteer and lockdown critic, and comedian Mark Dolan, who cut up a face mask live on air in protest at wearing them.

YouTube claimed the station had breached its community guidelines with material that “contradicted the expert consensus” but reversed its decision amid criticism including by Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove who defended the right to free speech.

“I don’t believe in censorship and we have a free and fair press, and we have commentators and interviewers of distinction who do criticise the government’s position,” Mr Gove said. “From Lord Sumption to Peter Hitchens and others, and long may it remain so. It’s absolutely right that people should ask questions.”

It is understood the case strengthened Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden’s belief in the need to enshrine free speech in the new online harms laws.

It follows last week’s criticism of Facebook by its independent oversight board for “indefinitely” banning Donald Trump from its sites.

Although the board upheld the decision to suspend his accounts, it said Facebook’s “indefinite” ban was inappropriate and breached its own guidelines on sanctions against users.

“The Trump affair did show that there is a potential risk in an election period that a democratic candidate could be removed from social media. Is it right that so much power sits in the boardrooms of social media companies?” said a source.

The race to chair Ofcom has proved controversial. Greg Dyke, a former BBC director-general, has claimed Mr Dacre’s "long-term antagonism towards the BBC would make him absolutely the wrong person to chair their regulator".

Ofcom’s proposed oversight of Facebook and Google comes in addition to its existing responsibilities on the BBC, broadband and Royal Mail.

Sir Tom has long experience as a regulator of both police and rail and his inspectorate has become a troubleshooter on sensitive issues, most recently in their inquiry backing police actions in clashes with protesters over Sarah Everard’s death.

Lord Vaizey is seen as a potential compromise figure. Last month he criticised the “binary” nature of the debate over Britain’s past and said he had "trouble with the sort of culture war that the Government wants to undertake".

It is understood all three were interviewed for the post last month and a decision could be announced within days.

The Government is also facing a backlash from campaigners who want the bill to go further by introducing criminal sanctions against tech bosses for the most egregious duty of care breaches.