Charities Join Together to Demand Access to Social Media Data

In an unprecedented plea, thirty-seven charities including the NSPCC, Barnardo’s, Save the Children and 5Rights have written an open letter to social media firms demanding they hand over data if it leads to serious harm or plays a part in a young person’s death. The charities are worried that bereaved families are being denied access to information that could be crucial in establishing what role social media played in their loved one’s death.

Following a five-year battle for the parents of Molly Russell, the 14-year-old who killed herself after viewing graphic images of self-harm and suicide on Instagram, Meta, Instagram's owner, released 12,000 of her posts. Andrew Walker, the coroner overseeing her inquest, ordered it in 2018.

The Russell family's solicitor, Jessica Elliot, stated that social media sites had developed a "self-supplying world of suicide material." Molly used her Instagram account more than 120 times a day in the days leading up to her death.

There is currently no obligation for social media companies to provide data to law enforcement without a court order, or under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, which gives coroners powers to require testimony or evidence from people and companies.

The charities are calling on the government to change the law to make it mandatory for social media companies to hand over data in cases where there is a suspicion of serious harm or death.

Companies work hard to ‘delay as long as possible.'

“It might take months, as Ian's situation demonstrates. Businesses will try to disguise or delay as much as possible, which is why the first inquest into Molly has taken so long,” a charity source said. The organizations want tighter data access rules and oversight from Ofcom. MPs who have studied the draft legislation back it up.

Social media executives should be held criminally accountable, according to charity organizations.

The NGOs have urged that social media executives be held criminally liable for failures in their duty of care and face up to two years in prison if they do not safeguard children from internet dangers. Under the current proposals, they would only be charged with failing to co-operate with Ofcom if they do not comply.

The debate also extends to the big tech companies, who would need to address "digital breadcrumbing," in which ostensibly legal child-oriented material is used to direct pedophiles to explicit child abuse content.

The government is currently consulting on the proposals and is expected to respond in the autumn.

Spotlite is the platform that has intended to provide this security through its features. It is important to have these debates and bring these issues to light in order to make progress. What do you think? Let us know in the comments.