• To what extent does the UK government have the right to intervene in the creation of online media?

I think the government partly have the right to intervene in the creation of explicit or triggering online media when social media content can be harmful to younger or more fragile audiences.

• The internet is of course largely unregulated, and mainly adopts a model of self-regulation. But how is it that it came to be like this?

Technological advances in A.I means that it is harder to regulate and control media regulation today.

• From the perspective of this report, who is responsible for regulation on the internet?

The Science and Technology Committee has concluded that social media companies must be subject to a legal duty of care to help protect young people’s health and wellbeing when accessing their sites.

• What is meant by the terms 'standards lottery' and 'patchwork' when applied to regulatory frameworks?
• “More worryingly, social media companies—who have a clear responsibility towards particularly young users—seem to be in no rush to share vital data with academics that could help tackle the very real harms our young people face in the virtual world" - from your perspective, why are social media companies not more forthright in sharing data and other information with academics?
• What possible ways are there of regulating online media? 
• Why is it particularly hard to implement a standardised and singular framework of regulation?
• How do other countries regulate online media?