Net Election Lifted, How would you do "Removing of Libel?"

Monday, May 20, 2013
On 26 May 2013 this week, the Revision of the Public Officers Elections Act will be enforced.
Finally, 'Election campaign' on the internet will be available in Japan. (Too late...)

That means, candidates (political parties) will be updating Facebook everyday during the campaign. Emailing as well. They can fairly appeal 'Please vote for me!' (It seems stupid now that telephoning over and over before.)

What you should be cautious is that even ordinary people are also 'campaigning'.
For example, anyone can originate messages such as 'Hooray for Candidate TANAKA!' or 'Support for candidate SUZUKI!' Or just carelessly be outgoing 'Candidate YAMADA, such guy shouldn't Win.'
However the regulations enforced this time, requires indication of 'information about contact' to whom campaigning and negative campaigning on their blog or Social network Services. It will not be a problem if posting to Facebook or Twitter, but need to be careful when letting the messages outgoing from blog or home page.

(Little bit digressing though,) "Election campaign" with email is still expressly prohibited in Japan. General public is not allowed 'election campaign' with email including Forwarding.

There seems to be happening new duties in service providing companies for blog and BBS.

A. Requesting deletion of libel and defamation against the author.
B. Notifying violation of duty of indication of contact information.

It seems like to become human tasks of considerable scale to me...
The person who would claim the "Delete of libel", would be the candidate him/herself. First of all, 'personal Identification' must be carry out. And if it is popular sites, there might be that notification of the breach of display duty will be a huge number. For Internet-related companies, maintenance of related business process (workflow development) is urgently needed.

[Public Article Modification Request flow]

[Public Article Modification Request flow: '1. Request Confirmation/ Candidate Identification' screen]

Needless to say, the mechanism is desirable which is quick, accurate and without leakage. However, the way it should be is different depending on the skill of the actual members and company size.

This Business Process here, assumes corresponding by 3 teams.
  • A team to accept the claims from the outside that they should be corrected the article. (Candidates, etc..)
  • A team to request correction or deletion to the author of the article.
  • A team to check the log or to execute deletion with the server management authority.

Although only on the handling manual of individual tasks will be a very difficult, but above all, the task of [3. Confirmation of Reply (deadline: 48h later)" will be really difficult.
For example, an ISP company requests to a blogger that 'We want you to delete your article because candidate KAWASAKI claims that it is a defamation'. It will not be a problem if the author reacted obediently. But the answer was 'This is not defamation. I refuse your request of deletion. I will publish your request of deletion', that is going to be a big problem. The case will go to court room eventually of course, but the ISP company might get involved into trouble if mistook in how to convey (initial motion).

By the way, I have presented a Business process Definition here, but the actual Business process shall be modified to be improved again and again in practical operation. That is, I do not think a Workflow should be (operational manual) is defined really tightly, simply with the "common guidelines" in the Industry Associations or "laws and regulations" which was recently enacted. This is a case, I want you to Rotate "Improvement Cycle of Business Processes", keeping in mind the principles of Business Process Management (BPM).

<Similar Models>

<<Related Articles>>