Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have difficulty with all of that. I preface what I say by saying that freedom of expression is vital. We interfere with freedom of expression at our peril. Within that framework we need transparency; we do not need jargon. We need honest communication of information. I am not hearing that. I would not go away reassured that the self-regulation by any of the companies represented here is working. I have listened to the submissions - I will stay on to listen to the others - and they seem to be reactive. I am hearing that in the past year things have been set up. Twitter has referred to robust policies in the last year. It is reactive depending on some outrage on our part over somebody suffering. I will not go into any of the personal details. That is what I am hearing. In addition, our guests all referred to the e-commerce directive, which is greatly outdated. None of them mentioned that it is greatly outdated. They have all used it as a shield. I understand that new legislation is about to be introduced. How will that affect the companies represented here? Have they looked at it?

I interrupted Ms White. What is the nature of the harm? Does it appal her on a personal level? Does she say, "Good Lord, if it was my child accessing that ..." or whatever? Can she point to things Twitter has done as a result?