Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits; people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals? On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act there should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater penalty than spreading it).

Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a deterrence would be a good thing.

IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).

The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large numbers.

Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the offline world… if we value our reputations?

*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane=huawei.com@lists. kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *kanini mutemi via kictanet *Sent:* Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM *To:* Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com> *Cc:* kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi@gmail.com> *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

I have attached a copy of the *Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 *published on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads:

*'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.'*

​Is there a drawback to this approach? ​

--

*Mercy Mutemi*.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

This is an interesting discussion even from the perspective of history. When technologies are new, the potential to confuse or confound users are well documented. One classic example is from radio, when a dramatized fictional piece about an invasion from Mars was aired on American radio in the late 1930s. Dramatic sound effects and other storytelling techniques via the new medium caused widespread panic. Today, audiences have a much greater understanding – and appreciation – for radio drama. There are other examples from other technologies, such as laugh tracks on television which sound like audiences laughing at the jokes being said by a character. That is essentially ‘fake laughter,’ but is designed to get real audiences to laugh along and engage with the characters. My point is that new technologies enable ‘fake’ activities, but it is users who finally attain a literacy concerning those activities and learn how to deal with them. The big buzz about fake news has made many people a lot more conscious and skeptical of what they consume or pass on via social media and other platforms. Various campaigns and organizations are turning fake news debunking into a new industry with multiple players reaching out to news media and academia to act as collaborative partners. As an academic, I think part of our job in our training institutions is to expose our students to: - being more critical/skeptical about what they consume on various media - being more responsible about what they share/forward in their own media networks - understanding that ‘media’ no longer means a random big company out there with radio, TV, and print outlets. But instead ‘media’ is all those, plus we ourselves. That said, @Ali makes important points on regulation that I largely agree with. But I’d say even as we discuss regulation, there should be a discussion about responsibility. Many media houses subscribe to some form of social responsibility. Before calling someone a thief for example, they’ll claim to get the facts and even then, refer to the ‘alleged’ crime leaving the justice system to declare whether someone is a thief or not. Without those checks, the media would be engaging in defamation, which is a legal problem. Perhaps before moving to add yet more laws and regulations to aspects of digital technologies, we should educate users/consumers more about greater responsibility in their online activities even as they are informed about legal penalties. Wambui On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Indeed, the issue of real-name social media accounts. Personally I support such a thing, but I am aware that others do not (i.e. they want to allow people to post anonymously in fear of retribution of posting something that may be true but critical against someone powerful). There is a balance to be struck.

But also, people who repeat/resend/republish should not do so unless they know the originator or trust it’s source. Unfortunately consumer education on this is very difficult (same for issues around responsible online gambling etc) and whilst we should still look at effective ways to do that (massive newspaper, TV and radio headlines about the risk of being fined for spreading fake news may be effective!!), we may need to look at other options too.

*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane=huawei.com@lists. kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet *Sent:* Friday, August 18, 2017 3:30 PM *To:* Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com> *Cc:* Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com>

*Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits; people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals?

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act there should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater penalty than spreading it).

Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a deterrence would be a good thing.

IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).

The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large numbers.

Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the offline world… if we value our reputations?

*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane=huawei.com@lists. kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *kanini mutemi via kictanet *Sent:* Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM *To:* Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com> *Cc:* kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi@gmail.com> *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

I have attached a copy of the *Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 *published on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads:

*'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.'*

​Is there a drawback to this approach? ​

--

*Mercy Mutemi*.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/wwamunyu2009%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

Hi listers, (a) Should the spreading of Fake News be a crime? - This thing is not a new problem as we think. Defamation is a form of spreading fake news especially if you look at the elements. I think we should consider the damage element before advocating for censorship. How about when Fake News leads to incitement? We have enough laws on hate speech which are selectively implemented. Our 'grundnorm' has provisions on hate speech (Art. 33(2)) and other laws. So we just need to implement those laws. (b) The NCIC (National Cohesion and Integration Commission) and the CA (Communications Authority); do these agencies have the sufficient mandate to combat Fake News? These agencies have very brilliant chaps who can sufficiently combat damaging Fake News. (c) Is it time we reguated social media use? Regulate social media? :-D We have already over regulated our speech because of the events of 2007. If people want to spread damaging fake news, they will do so even without social media. They have done that in the past, what will stop them now? On 18/08/2017, Fadzai Madzingira via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Dear List

As many people on this list have already pointed out, false news is not a new problem. That said, Facebook takes fighting false information seriously because people want to see accurate information on Facebook. In light of that we have set

These issues are complicated, and we want to be very careful. In a free society, there is not always a clear line between hoaxes, satire and opinion — and we want to ensure that people can share their opinions as was also so considerately highlighted in conversations on Day 1 of these excellent discussions. At the same time, we are careful not to be the arbiters of truth and that as a platform, we are not overstepping. Getting it right will take time, we need to ensure that as we help people get the meaningful information they want.

We also want to de-incentivize the bad, by contesting fabricated and false news so that publishers can't extract value from people without providing value in return. This involves:

* Reducing Spam: We're testing ways to make fake news less profitable for the people who spread it. Once a story is marked as disputed, ads directing people to that story will not be allowed. We will also work to reduce publications masquerading as other publishers from running ads, and work to reduce ads that include links to web pages that are mostly ads. * Supporting informed sharing: We’ve found that if reading an article makes people significantly less likely to share it, then it may be a sign that a headline and/or story has misled people in some way. We’re going to test incorporating this signal into the ranking of news stories, specifically for articles that are outliers in that people who read the article are significantly less likely to share it.

We work hard to find the right balance between encouraging free expression and promoting a safe and welcoming community. This is all a work in progress. We'll keep exploring new ways to help the people who use Facebook connect meaningfully and build common understanding. We understand how important the issue is for our community and we are committed to getting this right.

In Kenya, we launched an in-app educational tool in English and Swahili that was shown to our users in Kenya which many of you may have seen. These notices were placed in newspapers and radio stations as well. We also had an in-app educational tool to encourage users to report content that violated our Community Standards. We also understand the importance of the role of the media to inform our communities. We spent time training journalists in Nairobi on how best to use our tools to reach their readers effectively. These included Nation Media and the Standard Group.

As many others have also pointed out, we understand the importance of news media literacy and are actively working to partner locally and empower people to be informed consumers of news. This means that people know the right questions to ask and how to vet valid news sources when they are consuming the news. We would love to continue having this conversation in Kenya and hear where we can support such programs.

We take our responsibility very seriously and are encouraged by the conversation happening on this list. We take feedback very seriously and are following this discussion intently. Please do reach out to us with any questions.

Best

Fadzai Madzingira | Policy Analyst, Africa Africa Solutions Ltd @ Facebook (e) fmadzingira@fb.com<mailto:fmadzingira@fb.com>

From: kictanet <kictanet-bounces+fmadzingira=fb.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke> on behalf of Wambui Wambui via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Reply-To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, 18 August 2017 at 14:53 To: Fadzai Madzingira <fmadzingira@fb.com> Cc: Wambui Wambui <wwamunyu2009@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

This is an interesting discussion even from the perspective of history. When technologies are new, the potential to confuse or confound users are well documented. One classic example is from radio, when a dramatized fictional piece about an invasion from Mars was aired on American radio in the late 1930s. Dramatic sound effects and other storytelling techniques via the new medium caused widespread panic. Today, audiences have a much greater understanding – and appreciation – for radio drama.

There are other examples from other technologies, such as laugh tracks on television which sound like audiences laughing at the jokes being said by a character. That is essentially ‘fake laughter,’ but is designed to get real audiences to laugh along and engage with the characters.

My point is that new technologies enable ‘fake’ activities, but it is users who finally attain a literacy concerning those activities and learn how to deal with them. The big buzz about fake news has made many people a lot more conscious and skeptical of what they consume or pass on via social media and other platforms. Various campaigns and organizations are turning fake news debunking into a new industry with multiple players reaching out to news media and academia to act as collaborative partners.

As an academic, I think part of our job in our training institutions is to expose our students to:

- being more critical/skeptical about what they consume on various media

- being more responsible about what they share/forward in their own media networks

- understanding that ‘media’ no longer means a random big company out there with radio, TV, and print outlets. But instead ‘media’ is all those, plus we ourselves. That said, @Ali makes important points on regulation that I largely agree with. But I’d say even as we discuss regulation, there should be a discussion about responsibility.

Many media houses subscribe to some form of social responsibility. Before calling someone a thief for example, they’ll claim to get the facts and even then, refer to the ‘alleged’ crime leaving the justice system to declare whether someone is a thief or not. Without those checks, the media would be engaging in defamation, which is a legal problem.

Perhaps before moving to add yet more laws and regulations to aspects of digital technologies, we should educate users/consumers more about greater responsibility in their online activities even as they are informed about legal penalties.

Wambui

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>> wrote: Indeed, the issue of real-name social media accounts. Personally I support such a thing, but I am aware that others do not (i.e. they want to allow people to post anonymously in fear of retribution of posting something that may be true but critical against someone powerful). There is a balance to be struck.

But also, people who repeat/resend/republish should not do so unless they know the originator or trust it’s source. Unfortunately consumer education on this is very difficult (same for issues around responsible online gambling etc) and whilst we should still look at effective ways to do that (massive newspaper, TV and radio headlines about the risk of being fined for spreading fake news may be effective!!), we may need to look at other options too.

From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane>=huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke>] On Behalf Of Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 3:30 PM To: Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane@huawei.com>> Cc: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com<mailto:blongwe@gmail.com>>

Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits; people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals?

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>> wrote: I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act there should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater penalty than spreading it).

Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a deterrence would be a good thing.

IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).

The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large numbers.

Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the offline world… if we value our reputations?

From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane>=huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke>] On Behalf Of kanini mutemi via kictanet Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM To: Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane@huawei.com>> Cc: kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi@gmail.com<mailto:kaninimutemi@gmail.com>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

I have attached a copy of the Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 published on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads: 'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.' ​Is there a drawback to this approach? ​

-- Mercy Mutemi.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKNNlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4-JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_kictanet_blongwe-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=C5-MaYuO_GDVM8cdS5vi5rUfg8k4IyuAfGdNwPEbiWk&e=>

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKNNlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4-JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wwamunyu2009%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_kictanet_wwamunyu2009-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=vX4SFrFYADLwdIRq3RHh9hYflCQr4RxfBeAwlDr3AvI&e=>

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

-- Francis Monyango Lawyer | ICT Policy and Legal Consultant www.monyango.com 0726792792

So here is another angle to content regulation and domain name and policy- the role of Registrars (if at all they have a role to play). http://www.internetgovernance.org/2017/08/30/after-charlottesville-registrars-content-regulation-and-domain-name-policy/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+internetgovernance%2FabwE+%28IGP+Blog%29 GoDaddy and Google Domains take it upon themseleves to regulate 'a publication that is likely to incite violence' (read fake news here) by forcing the registrant to transfer the domain name. The grounds for this being violation of the Terms of Service. On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Grace Mutung'u via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Listers, In the US, there has been a rise in neo nazism. While the problem there is more of hate speech than fake news, there are some things we can learn about the principles of content regulation. For example, some companies took away services from Daily Stormer, a neo nazi website. Rights groups such as EFF are concerned that while this is laudable, there shouldn't be ad hoc and arbitrary regulatory actions.

One recommendation is the Mannila Principles on Intermediary Liability where there should be a published policy on instances that can lead to content takedowns and mechanisms for appeal of a takedown decision. Of course content can be taken down on court orders.

Some of the fake news sites are on .ke domains. I wonder whether KENIC has ever contemplated a content policy and if so whether domain owners are aware of the same.

The EFF blog can be found here https://www.eff.org/ deeplinks/2017/08/fighting-neo-nazis-future-free-expression

Have a nice weekend,

On 19 Aug 2017 08:12, "Francis Monyango via kictanet" < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

...

Hi listers,

(a) Should the spreading of Fake News be a crime? - This thing is not a new problem as we think. Defamation is a form of spreading fake news especially if you look at the elements. I think we should consider the damage element before advocating for censorship.

How about when Fake News leads to incitement? We have enough laws on hate speech which are selectively implemented. Our 'grundnorm' has provisions on hate speech (Art. 33(2)) and other laws. So we just need to implement those laws.

(b) The NCIC (National Cohesion and Integration Commission) and the CA (Communications Authority); do these agencies have the sufficient mandate to combat Fake News? These agencies have very brilliant chaps who can sufficiently combat damaging Fake News.

(c) Is it time we reguated social media use? Regulate social media? :-D We have already over regulated our speech because of the events of 2007. If people want to spread damaging fake news, they will do so even without social media. They have done that in the past, what will stop them now?

...

Dear List

As many people on this list have already pointed out, false news is not a new problem. That said, Facebook takes fighting false information seriously because people want to see accurate information on Facebook. In light of that we have set

These issues are complicated, and we want to be very careful. In a free society, there is not always a clear line between hoaxes, satire and opinion — and we want to ensure that people can share their opinions as was also so considerately highlighted in conversations on Day 1 of these excellent discussions. At the same time, we are careful not to be the arbiters of truth and that as a platform, we are not overstepping. Getting it right will take time, we need to ensure that as we help people get the meaningful information they want.

We also want to de-incentivize the bad, by contesting fabricated and false news so that publishers can't extract value from people without

...

value in return. This involves:

* Reducing Spam: We're testing ways to make fake news less

...

for the people who spread it. Once a story is marked as disputed, ads directing people to that story will not be allowed. We will also work to reduce publications masquerading as other publishers from running ads, and work to reduce ads that include links to web pages that are mostly ads. * Supporting informed sharing: We’ve found that if reading an

...

makes people significantly less likely to share it, then it may be a sign that a headline and/or story has misled people in some way. We’re going to test incorporating this signal into the ranking of news stories, specifically for articles that are outliers in that people who read the article are significantly less likely to share it.

We work hard to find the right balance between encouraging free expression and promoting a safe and welcoming community. This is all a work in progress. We'll keep exploring new ways to help the people who use Facebook connect meaningfully and build common understanding. We understand how important the issue is for our community and we are committed to getting this right.

In Kenya, we launched an in-app educational tool in English and Swahili

...

was shown to our users in Kenya which many of you may have seen. These notices were placed in newspapers and radio stations as well. We also had an in-app educational tool to encourage users to report content that violated our Community Standards. We also understand the importance of the role of the media to inform our communities. We spent time training journalists in Nairobi on how best to use our tools to reach their readers effectively. These included Nation Media and the Standard Group.

As many others have also pointed out, we understand the importance of news media literacy and are actively working to partner locally and empower people to be informed consumers of news. This means that people know the right questions to ask and how to vet valid news sources when they are consuming the news. We would love to continue having this conversation in Kenya and hear where we can support such programs.

We take our responsibility very seriously and are encouraged by the conversation happening on this list. We take feedback very seriously and are following this discussion intently. Please do reach out to us with any questions.

Best

Fadzai Madzingira | Policy Analyst, Africa Africa Solutions Ltd @ Facebook (e) fmadzingira@fb.com<mailto:fmadzingira@fb.com>

From: kictanet <kictanet-bounces+fmadzingira= fb.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke> on behalf of Wambui Wambui via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Reply-To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, 18 August 2017 at 14:53 To: Fadzai Madzingira <fmadzingira@fb.com> Cc: Wambui Wambui <wwamunyu2009@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

This is an interesting discussion even from the perspective of history. When technologies are new, the potential to confuse or confound users are well documented. One classic example is from radio, when a dramatized fictional piece about an invasion from Mars was aired on American radio in the late 1930s. Dramatic sound effects and other storytelling techniques via the new medium caused widespread panic. Today, audiences have a much greater understanding – and appreciation – for radio drama.

There are other examples from other technologies, such as laugh tracks on television which sound like audiences laughing at the jokes being said by a character. That is essentially ‘fake laughter,’ but is designed to get real audiences to laugh along and engage with the characters.

My point is that new technologies enable ‘fake’ activities, but it is users who finally attain a literacy concerning those activities and learn how to deal with them. The big buzz about fake news has made many people a lot more conscious and skeptical of what they consume or pass on via social media and other platforms. Various campaigns and organizations are turning fake news debunking into a new industry with multiple players reaching out to news media and academia to act as collaborative partners.

As an academic, I think part of our job in our training institutions is to expose our students to:

- being more critical/skeptical about what they consume on various media

- being more responsible about what they share/forward in

...

media networks

- understanding that ‘media’ no longer means a random big company out there with radio, TV, and print outlets. But instead ‘media’ is all those, plus we ourselves. That said, @Ali makes important points on regulation that I largely agree with. But I’d say even as we discuss regulation, there should be a discussion about responsibility.

Many media houses subscribe to some form of social responsibility. Before calling someone a thief for example, they’ll claim to get the facts and even then, refer to the ‘alleged’ crime leaving the justice system to declare whether someone is a thief or not. Without those checks, the media would be engaging in defamation, which is a legal problem.

Perhaps before moving to add yet more laws and regulations to aspects of digital technologies, we should educate users/consumers more about greater responsibility in their online activities even as they are informed about legal penalties.

Wambui

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>> wrote: Indeed, the issue of real-name social media accounts. Personally I support such a thing, but I am aware that others do not (i.e. they want to allow people to post anonymously in fear of retribution of posting something

...

may be true but critical against someone powerful). There is a balance to be struck.

But also, people who repeat/resend/republish should not do so unless

...

know the originator or trust it’s source. Unfortunately consumer education on this is very difficult (same for issues around responsible online gambling etc) and whilst we should still look at effective ways to do

...

(massive newspaper, TV and radio headlines about the risk of being fined for spreading fake news may be effective!!), we may need to look at other options too.

From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane =huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke ] On Behalf Of Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 3:30 PM To: Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane@huawei.com>> Cc: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com<mailto:blongwe@gmail.com>>

Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits; people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals?

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>> wrote: I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act

...

should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater penalty than spreading it).

Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a deterrence would be a good thing.

IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).

The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large numbers.

Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the offline world… if we value our reputations?

From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Badam.lane =huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke ] On Behalf Of kanini mutemi via kictanet Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM To: Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com<mailto:adam.lane@huawei.com>> Cc: kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi@gmail.com<mailto:kaninimutemi@gmail.com

...

Subject: Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

I have attached a copy of the Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017

...

on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads: 'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.' ​Is there a drawback to this approach? ​

-- Mercy Mutemi.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https ://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictan et.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlT

...

Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.co m/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtN lTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8 &m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4- JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongw e%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u= https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_kictanet_ blongwe-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MU w&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L183AZRm1O tfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=C5-MaYuO_GDVM8cdS5vi 5rUfg8k4IyuAfGdNwPEbiWk&e=>

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<https ://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.kictan et.or.ke_mailman_listinfo_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlT

On 18/08/2017, Fadzai Madzingira via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: providing profitable article that their own that they that there published h3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8& m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKN NlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=> h3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8& m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=NqW7SnhKwSKN NlkyJbyE4SD9CsiK2IQ_s28dBbOvN84&e=>

...

Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.co m/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_kictanet&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtN lTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8 &m=L183AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=gx4- JT3lxQ0u-9vlCS8lCyvrl8dDcc_nP3FG5kJd-Co&e=> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wwamun yu2009%40gmail.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/ url?u=https-3A__lists.kictanet.or.ke_mailman_options_ kictanet_wwamunyu2009-2540gmail.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3y cd41b3MUw&r=ZTXZJnM2G7XpW1nigbTKAbMf_WAiNCcV26BSnbjH2H8&m=L1 83AZRm1OtfqRls1hQuKJWz1mSLn_ISpFa-d3TBoCw&s=vX4SFrFYADLwdIRq 3RHh9hYflCQr4RxfBeAwlDr3AvI&e=>

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

-- Francis Monyango

Lawyer | ICT Policy and Legal Consultant www.monyango.com 0726792792

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/m ailman/options/kictanet/nmutungu%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/kaninimutemi%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

-- *Mercy Mutemi, Advocate*.

Good point Brian. To add, I always as a rule discount any message which ends with 'SENT AS RECEIVED' by 75%. I then read and verify, then decide whether to forward or not. I believe lots of Fake News won't see the light of day if we choose to exercise caution. Often we don't even read and only send because the headlines have caught our eyes. *Ali Hussein* *Principal* *Hussein & Associates* Tel: +254 713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim> 13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing, Chiromo Road, Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya. Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the organizations that I work with. On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Unfortunately the originators of fake news tend to use pseudonyms or fake identities to mask their true identities. IMHO these are the real culprits; people who repeat/resend/republish the fake news might actually have been duped into believing that it is authentic. How then does one go about catching/pinpointing the bad guys/gals?

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Adam Lane via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

...

I think that IF there is to be a civil crime/penalty for such an act there should be a distinction made between the creators of false, misleading or fictitious data and those who spread it (creating it should incur a greater penalty than spreading it).

Certainly IF this is the case, then a deterrence for those spreading the news will ensure people do read, research and assess before spreading, and this is important. Too many people not only are not assessing such news but are spreading it, and because others may trust them, the news is inherently trusted by the reader; whereas if the reader was sent the news from an unrelated person they would have more suspicion towards the news. Such a deterrence would be a good thing.

IF this bill becomes an act, it will be interesting to see how it will be enforced. It would be fairly simple to set-up a reporting mechanism but harder to ensure fines are paid (though such fines would cover the costs of any monitoring mechanism; it may be useful to have a set standard for fines to ensure prompt and fair action, just like traffic offenses).

The issue of real-name social media accounts, linking accounts to sim cards etc would be thorny; let alone the mechanisms to collect fines in such large numbers.

Is there a way that one does not need a fine, instead individuals may value their personal reputation enough to not forward fake news? If we constantly forward fake news (and if it is recognized as such at some point), don’t we lose our social capital, and thus limit this behavior? Just like in the offline world… if we value our reputations?

*From:* kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+adam.lane= huawei.com@lists.kictanet.or.ke] *On Behalf Of *kanini mutemi via kictanet *Sent:* Friday, August 18, 2017 2:27 PM *To:* Adam Lane <adam.lane@huawei.com> *Cc:* kanini mutemi <kaninimutemi@gmail.com> *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Talk to NCIC Day 3: Government Regulation of Fake News

I have attached a copy of the *Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 *published on 13th June, 2017. Clause 12 reads:

*'A person who intentionally publishes false, misleading or fictitious data or misinforms with intent that the data shall be considered or acted upon as authentic, with or without any financial gain, commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding five million shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both.'*

​Is there a drawback to this approach? ​

--

*Mercy Mutemi*.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/m ailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

Apologies for coming in late on this. Here's my take: *(a) Should the spreading of Fake News be a crime? How about when Fake News leads to incitement? * There's a lot to consider here before declaring fake news to be a crime. The question should be *cui bono*, who stands to gain the most? Fake news that seeks to manipulate consumer behaviour should be criminal, as should be fake news that spreads panic or disrupts the public order. The fact that much of it comes from shadowy sources that are hard to trace makes prosecution difficult. One can register a dodgy domain that looks legit, something like k24-news.com (which is an actual site that attempts to imitate MediaMax's K24) and use it to share questionable content. It's hard to trace, and its endgame is equally hard to identify. Going after the people behind these sites will be difficult, and could potentially lead to wastage of public resources. A better way to do this, in my opinion, would be flagging such fake news sites so that the authorities can see it and institute measures such as takedowns and domain seizures. *(b) The NCIC (National Cohesion and Integration Commission) and the CA (Communications Authority); do these agencies have the sufficient mandate to combat Fake News?*Both agencies have not taken sufficient measures in this situation. I have some understanding of their mandates, but all I have seen from them is public warnings and a few token prosecutions. I am yet to see any action that would deter someone looking to cause harm using fake news from doing so. While I appreciate the things that Hon. ole Kaparo and Mr Wangusi have said in public, I think more needs to be done by both agencies to enable members of the public report questionable content online. *(c) Is it time we reguated social media use? How? * This is a slippery slope. Regulating social media means that the Government would be involving itself in something that is very personal in nature. It has much potential for abuse, and I don't see any potential benefits here. Policing the social media space has the potential to backfire, as it is a violation of the constitutionally protected freedom of speech. There are other means to protect individuals that, if exercised correctly, should be sufficient, such as reporting individual posts that pose a demonstrable risk to public safety, at which point the authorities can act. Eric Mugendi about.me/mugendi [image: Eric Mugendi on about.me] <http://about.me/mugendi> On 19 August 2017 at 14:01, kanini mutemi via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

Dear Listers,

Here is a summary of Day 3:

*On (a): Should the spreading of Fake News be a crime? How about when Fake News leads to incitement? *

Once again, the issue of culpability of State and political players came up. We look forward to NCICs reaction to this.

As for individual criminal liability, a better approach would be to distinguish between those who generate Fake News and those who spread it; generation should attract more stringent penalties. Proper implementation of the existing laws on hate speech would satisfactorily address incitement through Fake News.

We considered Clause 12 of the Computer and Cybercrimes Bill, 2017 which criminalizes the publication of false data. It was pointed out that implementing such a provision would be difficult since most Fake News accounts are created using fake identities. A possible solution would be to require real name social media accounts.

*On (b) The NCIC (National Cohesion and Integration Commission) and the CA (Communications Authority); do these agencies have the sufficient mandate to combat Fake News?*

These agencies do have the mandate. It was emphasized that implementation of existing laws needs to be stepped up as opposed to further legislation. NCIC was called upon to be impartial in executing its mandate.

*On (c) Is it time we regulated social media use? How? *

It was felt that there is enough regulation as it is. Existing legislation should be complemented with educating the public on online responsibility. The current curriculum review process presents a good opportunity to introduce media and information literacy in schools.

As well, we must be careful not to infringe on the freedom of expression even as we look for suitable regulatory solutions.

The issue of content takedowns also came up. KENIC was challenged to come up with a content policy (or create awareness if there is already one). This is a complex area that needs further discussion.

A big thank you to NCIC for initiating this conversation. We eagerly await NCICs response to the issues raised.

It has been a pleasure moderating this discussion. Asanteni sana! -- *Mercy Mutemi*.

_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/emugendi%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.