The Government introduced the Online Safety Bill to Parliament yesterday. As it stands, the Bill falls short of the Government’s aim to make the UK the safest place to be online.
Ultimately, this legislation will affect us all, but at present it leaves the public vulnerable and exposed to online harms. The Government has not learned lessons from the last two years, where misinformation and disinformation was able to undermine public health during a pandemic.
Parliament must now make the most of its opportunity to challenge, scrutinise and improve the Bill. It must limit the damage caused by bad information, and end internet companies’ ability to make unaccountable decisions for UK internet users from offices on the other side of the world.
As a Full Fact reader, we want your voice to be heard in our campaign to make sure harmful misinformation is tackled in the Online Safety Bill.
Can you let us know what you think, by answering a few questions? It shouldn't take longer than five minutes, and your views will make a huge difference.
Asked whether a Ukrainian living and working in the UK would be able to bring their family members over, Health Secretary Sajid Javid said:
“[For] a Ukrainian living and working here [on a visa], you will be able to bring your family here to the UK under the Extended Family Scheme.”
But the Home Office’s guidance on the subject says family members can only apply to join a UK-based relative if the relative:
- Is a British national
- Has some form of settled status in the UK
- Has pre-settled status from an EU country (or equivalent)
- Has refugee status or humanitarian protection in the UK.
Crucially, people in the UK on work visas aren’t mentioned in the criteria.
The Home Office confirmed to us that the published criteria is the most accurate and up-to-date information available. It follows that Mr Javid was incorrect in the claim he made about family members of people in the UK on work visas.
There are alternative routes by which Ukrainian family members can join their relatives in the UK, like the “local sponsorship scheme for Ukraine,” which the Health Secretary referred to in the same interview.
We’re seeking someone with experience of rigorous analysis and effective communication to conduct a critical review of the editorial content we’ve published and report on its strengths and weaknesses to help us find ways we can improve our work.
This is a short term engagement reviewing a selection of our published content from the past year. This is expected to shape how we operate in future so we do want to recruit carefully.
Since the invasion of Ukraine, you may have seen photographs of prisoners of war shared on social media. Traditional media outlets the Mail, Express, Mirror, Telegraph and Times have also published such images.
But some people, including Foreign Affairs Select Committee chair Tom Tugendhat, have claimed this practice contravenes the Geneva Convention.
But it isn’t always true that sharing identifiable pictures of prisoners of war would breach the Geneva Convention. However, in practice, the government and British Red Cross suggest such images should not normally be shared, and many journalists and social media users may choose not to do so.
Article 13 of the Third Geneva Convention, while not explicitly mentioning photography or film, does say: “prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.”
