Terror Clampdown: What More Can Netfirms Do?

Politicians are demanding action against extremist content. Stewart Mitchell investigates whether that might backfire.

- Stewart Mitchell

Deflecting attention or rightly apportioning blame? That was the debate after the prime minister told internet firms that they must do more to tackle extremism in the aftermath of the recent terror attacks on the UK.

The extent to which any of the recent terrorists were radicalised online is unclear, but there’s no doubt the internet is increasingly the vehicle for terrorist activity. According to figures from international policy group, Counter Extremism Project (CEP), searches for the dead al-Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki alone yielded 80,300 pieces of extremist content as of 5 June 2017, up from 61,900 results in December 2015.

“Despite YouTube’s pledge to remove hateful material, CEP has instead found Awlaki content to be increasingly available on the platform,” said Steven Cohen, director of CEP. “ISIS changed the landscape of extremism by being the first group to fully exploit the digital world to propagandise, radicalise and recruit new members.

“The power of the web to radicalise and inspire attacks has been shown time and time again, as has the inability of internet and social media companies to effectively combat it.”

While all parties acknowledge that there’s a problem, some experts believe it is wrong to assert access to extremist material is solely responsible for radicalising terrorists. “The suggestion that the internet intermediaries could solve it if they wanted to is completely misplaced,” said Paul Bernal, a lecturer in IT, human rights and media law at the University of East Anglia. “It’s not like they don’t try.”

“To push the blame onto the internet when there are so many contributory factors is an illusion,” Bernal added. “It deflects from the criticism of police cuts.”

Filter and flag