The LibDems are calling for the “stringent oversight” of YouTube adverts for the sake of “online safety“. Writing for LBC today, the party’s ‘spokesperson for Science, Innovation and Technology’ Victoria Collins has demanded the government hands even more powers to Ofcom, with greater fines and pre-vetting of content on the table. As if Ofcom isn’t already busy enough policing the rest of the internet…
“The Government needs to get hold of this problem by ensuring Ofcom treats YouTube advertising with the same stringent oversight as it does for TV and radio… Fines for platforms that fail to protect consumers should not just be a slap on the wrist; they need to act as a genuine deterrent. For those who break rules, the proceeds of fines should be used to support the victims of online harms.
Rogue advertisers are all too happy to exploit the loopholes of the current system. As YouTube’s influence continues to grow, so does the potential for harm…”
It’s no coincidence this sort of thinking is rearing its head, with YouTube now the second most-popular media service in the UK…
Statement by Paul Dacre, Editor-in-Chief of Associated Newspapers Limited, following Harry’s loss in court today:
“Prince Harry wrote a sad book which boasted about his killing of 25 Taliban, his drug-taking and, in cringe-making detail, how he lost his virginity. There isn’t a laundry in the cosmos big enough to wash all the dirty linen he has aired about his own family. For him, to complain about HIS privacy being invaded takes, not just the biscuit, but the whole tin. Poor Harry. I feel sorry for the way a confused and angry young man has been drawn into this case. The bitter irony is that his mother, Diana, liked the Mail. We were her paper. We took her side in her acrimonious break up with Charles. She and I would speak and meet. The Mail’s superb royal reporter was her friend and confidante. The truth is that this trumped-up action – which has cost well over £50 million and wasted a huge amount of valuable court time – should never have been brought to trial. That it did, raises profoundly disturbing questions about the conduct of elements of the legal profession. Today’s verdict is not just a victory for Associated’s magnificent journalists – several of whom have had a terrible toll imposed on their health and lives – but a free press generally. Make no mistake. This was a conspiracy, supported by Hacked Off, to destroy a paper. Financed by the orgy-loving, racist Max Mosley and involving the actor Hugh Grant, it was also a sinister bid to resuscitate Leveson Two and impose statutory regulation on the press which, even now, is rearing its ugly head in Labour’s Media Green Paper.”