We agree with your characterisation of the online harms white paper as a flawed attempt to deal with serious problems (Regulating the internet demands clear thought about hard problems, Editorial, 9 April). However, we would draw your attention to several fundamental problems with the proposal which could be disastrous if it proceeds in its current form.

Firstly, the white paper proposes to regulate literally the entire internet, and censor anything non-compliant. This extends to blogs, file services, hosting platforms, cloud computing; nothing is out of scope.

Secondly, there are a number of undefined “harms” with no sense of scope or evidence thresholds to establish a need for action. The lawful speech of millions of people would be monitored, regulated and censored.

The result is an approach that would make China’s state censors proud. It would be very likely to face legal challenge. It would give the UK the widest and most prolific internet censorship in an apparently functional democracy. A fundamental rethink is needed.

Antonia Byatt Director, English PEN

Silkie Carlo Big Brother Watch

Thomas Hughes Executive director, Article 19

Jim Killock Executive director, Open Rights Group

Joy Hyvarinen Head of advocacy, Index on Censorship

• I could not help contrasting the two-page spread on web censorship (Proposals for web regulation raise concerns over censorship, 9 April) with the short paragraph on page 15 of the same edition concerning Laleh Shahravesh, a resident here, and her troubles in Dubai (Mother faces two years in prison after Facebook remarks, 9 April).

During my watch with Fair Trials Abroad, we were constantly bedevilled by the contrast between the modern tourist attractions and facilities in the UAE and its draconian laws. In my experience, we must be careful to distinguish between relatively mild abuse in a domestic squabble and serious incitement.

Stephen Jakobi

Richmond, London

• It’s concerning that Ofcom is investigating Jon Snow for remarking of a pro-Brexit rally in Whitehall that he had never seen so many white people in one place (Snow to be investigated for ‘white’ comment, 9 April). Given that the rally had been addressed by far-rightist Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, it seems likely that Snow’s statement was accurate.

He might have provided balance by reporting that a protest called by Stand Up to Racism at the same time, which contained both leavers and remainers, attracted a crowd rather more representative of modern Britain.

Keith Flett

Tottenham, London

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters

• Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition