"Removing Illegal Information Alone Cannot Prevent Harmful Information... Preventive Risk-Management Systems Needed"

[Financial News] As illegal and harmful posts continue to spread online, experts have called for platforms to be required not only to take post hoc measures, such as removing illegal information, but also to assess and mitigate risks that may arise from their services in advance. They particularly argued that laws should require age-appropriate service design and restrictions on access to harmful content to protect children and adolescents.

Shin Mi-yong, an attorney at Shin Mi-yong Law Office, said on the 16th at the forum titled "Safe Digital Spaces, New Standards for Rights and Responsibilities—A Forum on Enacting an Online Safety Act," hosted by Lee Joo-hee of the Democratic Party of Korea at the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea in Yeouido, "It is necessary to establish a system for a systemic response rather than relying on reports and notifications concerning individual pieces of illegal information."
Attorney Shin assessed that harmful information distributed online is connected to structural problems within platforms, extending beyond individual posts. "Online information can spread on a massive scale worldwide, and the boundary between information producers and users is becoming increasingly blurred," Shin explained. "As algorithms become intertwined with advertising and monetization structures, the impact of information can grow even further." Shin therefore proposed that, when enacting an Online Safety Act, South Korea expand platform operators' responsibilities from post hoc responses to preventive risk management, drawing on overseas systems such as the European Union's (EU) Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Online Safety Acts of the United Kingdom and Australia.
The EU's DSA requires online platforms and search engines to periodically assess systemic risks that may arise from recommendation algorithms, advertising systems, and service operations, and to take measures to reduce those risks. Shin explained, "The DSA is not a law under which the state directly reviews and removes disinformation. Its core is to institutionalize platform procedures and transparency, risk management, and remedies for users' rights, thereby shifting responsibility from individual posts to systemic responsibility."
The United Kingdom's and Australia's Online Safety Acts were also presented as reference cases. The United Kingdom uses age-assurance measures to prevent young people from being exposed to harmful content and requires such content to be identified using certified technology and removed. In Australia, the responsible minister may require operators to prepare regular reports on compliance with basic online safety requirements, and impose fines for noncompliance. Industry groups are also establishing and implementing industry codes to prevent the distribution of illegal information under the Online Safety Act.

Speakers also argued that the level of protection provided by platforms should vary according to users' ages and the characteristics of each service. Possible measures include banning children under 14 from registering while allowing registration with the consent of a legal representative, or not providing adolescents aged 14 to under 19 with addictive scrolling features as default settings.
In a subsequent presentation, Kim Joo-hyun, the second policy director of the Korean Bar Association (KBA), emphasized that users must be guaranteed procedural rights to meaningfully challenge platform decisions if user protection and freedom of expression are to be balanced. Because platform decisions to remove posts or suspend accounts directly affect users' rights, Kim stressed, "Users must be able to know the applicable standards before a decision is made, and afterward, they must be told the reasons and be able to explain their circumstances." Kim added, "A system for protecting rights is needed that allows users to have their cases reconsidered by an independent external body, rather than limiting them to an internal platform appeal procedure." The explanation was that independent redress procedures should be established to check arbitrary platform decisions while protecting users' freedom of expression.
Lee Joo-hee of the Democratic Party of Korea said, "We must carefully design procedures for reporting, notification, appeals, and dispute resolution so that victims can obtain swift relief and users who have been subjected to unfair measures can properly challenge them." She added, "I will prepare legislation that balances user protection and freedom of expression by fully reflecting the criticisms and alternatives raised today."

[email protected] Choi Hye-rim Reporter