Why Multistakeholder Action Matters More than Ever for Trust & Safety

Paul Ash is chief executive of the Christchurch Call Foundation.

In moments of uncertainty, multistakeholder approaches to tackling difficult problems can seem quite demanding. They are certainly not easy.

Governments, tech companies, civil society organizations, researchers, and affected communities bring together people with different incentives, worldviews, and priorities. Conversations can be uncomfortable, and agreement can be elusive.

And yet, at a time of profound technological change and rising geopolitical tension, it is precisely these kinds of spaces that we need most.

Over the past few years, I have watched with growing concern as many of the institutions and forums that helped shape the internet's trust and safety architecture have become increasingly strained. Some have struggled to sustain participation or navigate polarized political environments. And at the same time, focus and resources have shifted toward emerging priorities, particularly around artificial intelligence.

In some respects, that is understandable. AI is capturing a significant share of the world's attention, and new forums are emerging to address the opportunities and risks it presents. Yet the result is that there are fewer spaces today where governments, companies, researchers, and civil society can come together for the kind of sustained, deep engagement needed to tackle difficult issues over time. That should concern all of us.

As we build new forums to address the challenges posed by emerging technologies, we should be careful not to neglect the collaborative infrastructure that already exists.

Not all the challenges we associate with AI are new. Safety, accountability, transparency, governance, resilience, and public trust have long been a part of trust and safety work. What has changed is the speed, scale, and complexity of the environment in which those conversations are taking place.

One thing I've learned from this work is that progress tends to happen when different perspectives are brought together. Our challenges are simply too complex for any one group to tackle alone. These conversations involve competing priorities, legitimate disagreements, and complex trade-offs between safety, innovation, rights, and security. Multistakeholder processes create space for people with different perspectives to work through disagreement constructively, and to co-develop innovative solutions.

We need places where those conversations can happen consistently and in good faith. We need spaces where assumptions can be challenged respectfully and where diverse perspectives and expertise can contribute to better outcomes. Online harms don't stop at the edge of an organization's remit or a country's borders. Addressing them requires the willingness to work across those lines.

That is one of the enduring lessons of the Christchurch Call.

Since its inception, the Call has brought together governments, tech companies, and civil society organizations around a shared objective: preventing terrorists and violent extremists from exploiting online platforms. Participants have not always agreed. However, sustained engagement has helped us build relationships and advance practical initiatives.

One of the clearest examples of this multistakeholder approach in action is the Crisis Response Protocol (CRP), developed jointly by members of the Call Community. The CRP enables a rapid and coordinated response to real-world terrorist attacks with an online component. By tackling the spread of terrorist and violent extremist content online when incidents occur, this protocol is intended to deny terrorists and violent extremists the ability to use the internet to expand their harmful impact.

The commitment to practical action also shapes our emerging work on AI. For example, it is reflected in the development of our AI safety benchmark, which assesses how AI systems respond to potentially harmful interactions in multi-turn conversations, using OSINT-grounded scenarios and evaluation criteria designed by experts. We’re looking forward to sharing the benchmark publicly in a few weeks’ time.

This need for collective action feels particularly important today. AI gives us yet another compelling reason to invest in the institutions and relationships that make effective governance possible. New technologies may require new thinking, but in many cases, we should draw on the expertise in existing groups to build on the collaboration that has underpinned progress in trust and safety for years.

The Christchurch Call Foundation remains committed to that work and values working with organizations and individuals who share the Call’s principles, objectives and commitment to collective action. The strength of the Call comes from the diversity of voices around the table.

The challenges facing the digital environment are unlikely to become simpler in the years ahead. Our experience over the past seven years has shown what can be achieved when governments, industry, and civil society stay engaged, even when consensus is difficult, and as technologies evolve. At a time when technological change is accelerating and geopolitical tensions are reshaping the global landscape, opportunities for deep engagement matter more than ever. Our future will depend not only on the technologies we build, but on our ability to build understanding, trust, and practical solutions together.