Paul Murphy: Government Protecting Big Tech, Not Kids
Paul Murphy criticised the Government's handling of online safety, arguing it shields big tech profits instead of protecting children. He said the Bill under debate is a simple, necessary response to recommender algorithms and warned the Digital Services Act is insufficient.
Key accusation
Murphy told the Dáil there is a gulf between words and actions, asserting the Government's "relentless commitment" to online safety amounts to protecting the profits of big tech companies. He accused ministers of using rhetoric while preparing to vote down the Bill meant to curb harmful algorithm-driven content.
On the Digital Services Act
He challenged the reliance on the Digital Services Act, saying its Article 27 risk-mitigation measures amount to light-touch regulation or de facto self-regulation. Murphy argued that invoking the DSA as a reason to reject the Bill leaves young people exposed to ongoing harms.
Evidence cited
Murphy cited internal Meta research, saying 64% of extremist group joins came via recommendation tools and that a 2019 internal document admitted content moderation was impossible and recommended focusing on stopping artificial amplification. He drew a parallel with big tobacco in terms of companies knowing about harms while profiting.
Recommender systems and consequences
He condemned recommender systems and algorithms for amplifying toxic, misogynistic and extremist material to young people, arguing that switching off algorithmic recommendations would return feeds to user-curated content showing friends and community. He referenced comments by Albert Dolan to illustrate the change in feed dynamics if algorithms were disabled.
Demand for the Bill
Murphy said the proposed Bill is the clear answer called for by a very wide range of organisations and experts and insisted the State should not accept industry-friendly deregulation. He urged colleagues to recognise the practical threat posed by recommender systems and to support measures that would reduce algorithmic harm.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Thanks. There's a gulf between words and actions here, because the Minister says, and I would welcome if it was true, that the Government has a relentless commitment to online safety. But that's part of a speech which is justifying why you're going to vote down this Bill. And again, I'll repeat, it's very simple, it's very clear, it's an answer to the toxic torrent of material that is being fed to young people in particular. It is the answer that's been called for by a very wide range of organisations and experts who have looked at this issue. And so what it looks like in practice is that the Government has a relentless commitment, all right, but that's a commitment to protecting the profits of big tech companies. It's why at a European level they're not standing up against the big tech lobbying operation to further deregulate, to further undermine the levels of protections we have at a European level. And now domestically, you're going to vote this down on the spurious basis that, don't worry, we're already dealing with it under the Digital Services Act. I mean, what that means is, you referred to Article 27 of the Digital Services Act, the requirement to mitigate risks, including to minors, requirement that very large platforms must give an option of algorithms that don't rely on profiling. Effectively, this is light-touch regulation, and it may as well be self-regulation. The big tech companies can do what they want. And it's very interesting that in the senior minister's speech, which we heard earlier, there is a line of argument that is pretty much directly taken from the tech companies' lobbying. So the tech companies' lobbying that resulted in this proposal being taken out of the online safety code, they said, and I quote, Recommender systems play an important role in ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment by ensuring that users are connected to relevant and high-quality information. The minister says, recommender systems and algorithms serve to protect people, including children and young people, from harmful content. The companies know that's not true. Report from Meta, there was internal research by Meta, which said 64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendation tools. Our recommendation systems grow the problem. A 2019 internal meta-document affirmed that content moderation is impossible, and the focus should instead be on stopping artificial amplification. The parallels with big tobacco are clear in terms of the harms being done to young people, and the fact that these people know all about it. They know the profits that they're making from it. Final point, I mean, the minister asked a question. This would be, the algorithms are preferable to the unknown risk of switching off those recommender systems. It's bizarre. I mean, listen to Albert Dolan, a backbench Fianna Fáil TD, who precisely described what happens if you turn off the algorithm system. We go back to a space whereby our social media feeds are curated by us. We get to choose who we see. We get to see the wholesome space of seeing our friends, our community, etc., as opposed to having toxic, misogynistic content being fed to young people in particular. We'll take care of you.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
