The holy grail

Governments around the world seem focused on regulating technology and all appear to be searching for the holy grail – regulation that can stop harms, mitigate against concentrations of platform power, and protect the public interest online whilst preserving free speech. Existing laws and regulations are battling against a tide of technological development – the latest, generative AI. But is regulating technology any different to regulating any other public behaviour?

At a recent Policy and Internet Conference at the University of Sydney, Professor Johanna Weaver of the ANU Tech Policy Design Centre said she thinks the answer to that question should be ‘no’ because getting technology regulation right needs the same framework that other regulation uses, with the same aim - to ensure our collective and individual futures.

So, what’s the framework for good policy making? It’s surprisingly simple – for tech and all else, at least according to Professor Weaver.

The core principle to keep in mind, she says is that designing tech policy is a journey, not a destination – the problem is constantly changing so the response has to move with it, making delegated and regulatory powers very important. She also thinks a well-defined outcome is a problem half solved – therefore, keeping an open mind is important. And good tech policy creates clarity and certainty, which means that even bad policy that delivers certainty is actually good. Finally, consultation is not a ‘step’; it’s vital and consulting with people outside the tent is key.

Professor Weaver thinks these core principles for designing policy to protect the public from the pernicious aspects of technological development should make the exercise if not easier, then more productive for governments – and handily, create a future in which people, tech and the planet thrive. Her advice should come in handy for the federal government as it sifts through submissions from those inside and outside the tent on the draft bill to give ACMA more power to regulate what kind of information the digital platforms carry.

Also, in our newsletter this week Tim takes a look at the US site 538 – once a darling of the start-up scene – which has been absorbed by Disney’s ABC and is now a shadow of its old self. 

Derek is looking at the increasingly fractured state of our supposedly national defamation laws.  And Ayesha examines the potential of AI to change the way reporters cover refugees and detention centres – especially with the use of AI generated images.

Read it in full here.

Monica Attard, CMT Co-Director