Rival politicians Matt Hancock and Rupa Huq have united to urge that Sir David Amess’s murder sparks permanent change to tackle online hatred of politicians and “set public debate on a better path”.
In a co-authored column in The Times, Tory Mr Hancock and Labour’s Ms Huq said the killing of the veteran MP had “shocked parliament to its core”, and that they had also been “disgusted” to see MP Michael Gove harassed in public only days later.
The pair said democracy “cannot survive a continuing coarsening of public debate” and called on social media companies – “the creators of algorithms that feed people content that only reinforces what they already think” – to bear responsibility.
They also shone a light on the difficulty of enforcing libel laws in the internet age.
“There have been hecklers as long as there have been public meetings. But using online social media, keyboard warriors post accusatory, aggressive messages often based on conspiracy theories and lies. Our timelines and inboxes are awash with threats,” Mr Hancock and Ms Huq wrote.
They pair said female politicians, particularly from ethnic minority backgrounds, received the worst online abuse but white men were not immune, citing one social media post calling for Mr Hancock to be executed live on BBC One.
The murder of MP Jo Cox, they wrote, had been followed only weeks later by “unprecedented vitriol” surrounding the EU referendum.
“This time we must make permanent changes to tackle the problem and set public debate on a better path,” they said. “The online harms bill is a good start, but it does not yet tackle anonymous abuse.
“It is a particular problem that libel laws don’t work in the internet age. It is hard to prove that a single post by a social media user with a few hundred followers causes significant damage, but when that post is shared and added to by hundreds or thousands of others, it has the same effect as a defamatory newspaper piece in days gone by.”
Saying politicians also needed to treat each other with respect, Mr Hancock and Ms Huq said threats could no longer be ignored and that a permanent campaign was needed “because ‘keep calm and carry on’ is no longer an option”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article