A couple of months back I blogged about how the Government hasn't made use of its powers to update the law requiring election leaflets to have an imprint to cover the online world of websites, email, social networks and so on. The story got a burst of media coverage, including from the BBC, but the Government hasn't shifted.
As my post also got positive feedback from across the political spectrum, I thought it worth trying to come up with a voluntary code that parties can sign up to (and which, if a success, could form the basis for future official action). Thanks in particular to Labour MP Tom Watson for his positive response.
So here is the current version of the draft I'm working on, based on a post on The Wardman Wire. See my original post for more background and please do make comments and suggestions and, if you are involved in a political party, encourage it to consider adopting the final version as a voluntary code of conduct.
A voluntary code is never going to stop someone determined to do dark deeds, but it will help steer the naive, exhausted or inexperienced towards better behaviour - just as the voluntary code of conduct on postal voting has done.
Overall principles
- The logic for having imprints on printed literature – making clear who it is from, informing people who is legally responsible for the contents etc. – applies as well to online material as offline.
- Online imprints should be easy to access and should not be so burdensome as to make it impossible or impractical to use a particular technology. If that is the case, the imprint information should instead be readily and clearly available from elsewhere.
- The information should be readily available, e.g. not requiring someone to watch a 10 minute film to find it.
Information that should be provided in online imprints
- The same trio of information should appear as for printed material – the electronic equivalent of the printer, the promoter and who they have promoted it on behalf of.
- Although the concept of "printer" does not apply neatly to the online world, there is still a useful distinction between who has produced content and whose systems are being used to distribute it. For example, for email knowing who is being used to send the email allows someone to get in touch to stop mass spamming.
- The “printer” for web services is the firm who provides the service, e.g. Facebook or YouTube. For distribution services, such as email, the “printer” is the firm whose technology does the distribution, e.g. the firm running the SMTP server used.
Audiovisual material
- In order for the imprint information to be readily available to people, it should be available at the start of any such material or immediately adjacent to the material (such as on the packaging of a box that a DVD comes in).
- Where audiovisual material can be republished or embedded elsewhere, only having the imprint adjacent to the audiovisual material in its original location is not sufficient.
Material with length limits
- If, and only if, a technology imposes a length limit on content which means that a full imprint would take up more than 15% of a message, the imprint need not be included with the message.
- Where the message automatically contains a link back to a profile or user page, such as tweets, then the full imprint information should be provide on that profile or user page.
- Where there are no such links, such as with text messages, either it must be possible to reply to the message, or the message must contain contact details, and either way any reply requesting the imprint information should be responded to within 48 hours.
