Speech regulation is an especially thorny issue in the United States: with the First Amendment confining its actions, the government ostensibly cannot pass significant regulation. But that does not mean that other stakeholders do not pick up the slack. Hybrid governance institutions, ones where government is not the main actor, aim to fill that gap. While some are industry-led, which can court controversy, others are multistakeholder in nature, benefitting from the input of other voices, including civil society. Each such institution or ad-hoc initiative has its own distinct structure, goals and outputs, but together they represent an attempt at building innovative responses to the status quo of online platform regulation. Should society focus on building more of these structures, or would non-speech regulation, like limiting advertising practices be more impactful? Join our panelists as they discuss three existing examples of hybrid speech governance.
- [Moderator] David Morar, Data Policy Fellow, Digital Interests Lab, NYU
- Chris Riley, Senior Fellow, Internet Governance, R Street Institute
- Rachel Wolbers, Head of Global Engagement, Oversight Board
- Nathalie Marechal, Policy Director, Ranking Digital Rights
- David Sullivan, Executive Director, Digital Trust and Safety Partnership