How to combat disinformation? - part II

The Digital Service Act and the European challenges

  Articoli (Articles)
  Giorgio Giardino
  30 November 2022
  5 minutes, 27 seconds

Fighting misinformation has become a common goal of many states that, with different approaches and results, are trying to invade a field that until now has seen digital platforms as the only protagonists. This need starts precisely from the awareness that Big Tech has not so far succeeded in curbing this worrying phenomenon, which today represents a serious threat to be countered.

Among the various actors who are trying to find a solution to the spread of false information there is one in particular that aims to become a point of reference, not only in the management of disinformation, but also in the regulation of the entire digital ecosystem: the European Union.

Disinformation does not spare the old continent either, where campaigns have been in progress for a long time and aim to strongly influence European public opinion on various issues. Think, for instance, of the false reports about the vaccines that swept through us during the pandemic period or, even more recently, the misinformation about the conflict in Ukraine fed by Moscow. It is well known that Russia has been using this weapon for years now to try to impose its own narrative.

For these reasons, the European Union has identified this as a priority, and it is in this sense that we must read the recent efforts that led to the adoption of the Digital Service Act, which entered into force in November and will be implemented from May 2023.

The Digital Service Act

The European approach to disinformation, but also to the general regulation of content on platforms, starts from a clear requirement: to impose the necessary control while respecting the enjoyment of the fundamental rights connected to the network, including, in particular, freedom of expression. This imperative has resulted in a system that includes obligations of control and monitoring by platforms, but also greater transparency in decisions and simple and effective remedies for individual users.

The system devised by European legislators is based on a gradual increase in the obligations imposed as the size of the platform increases. This means limiting in a more stringent way the action of those social networks that are more able to influence the public discourse of our societies. The very large platforms, which have a number of European users of 45 million or more, are therefore subject to more rules than others. For example, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, just to name a few.

In addition to the various rules on transparency and the existence of complaint mechanisms, they are therefore subject to systemic obligations. In essence, the most popular platforms will have to conduct risk assessments to understand how and to what extent false news is spread in their digital space, which can, for example, disrupt the proper conduct of electoral processes, or even illegal content. But above all, they will also have to put in place adequate and reasonable countermeasures, always taking into account the necessary respect for rights, and in primis the freedom of expression of the users.

The most important innovation of the DSA, however, is the presence of a sanction system. Big Tech companies that break the rules can then receive fines that reach up to 6% of their worldwide annual turnover. These sanctions, together with the size of the market that Europe represents for these companies, make it difficult for these platforms to decide to withdraw, thus creating the conditions for the success of this regulation.

Crisis response mechanism

Within the DSA, however, there is an article that has raised some concerns from some associations, including Article19, an international organization that deals with the promotion and defense of freedom of expression and information. Article 36 refers to a crisis response mechanism that allows the Commission to impose certain measures when "exceptional circumstances pose a serious threat to public safety or public health in the Union".

According to the statement shared last April, this rule could lead to an excessive restriction of freedom of expression and information, putting the Commission in a position to decide unilaterally when a crisis is effective or not. The lack of a clear enough definition of what a crisis could represent and the absence of a time limit to these measures would create the risk of a permanent crisis.

The pandemic and the Russian war in Ukraine have shown that it is necessary to have in place tools that can respond quickly and effectively to threats from the online world, including mainly misinformation. These concerns remain, however, acceptable, even if it is necessary to underline that, in the European context, there are counterweights that limit the scope of such a measure.

The first challenge: Elon Musk and Twitter

There seems to be little doubt about what will be the first major challenge for the Europe Union: it is for sure Twitter and its new owner, Elon Musk. The purchase of the social media by the American billionaire has in fact fueled several concerns, especially after Musk decided, through a highly criticized poll, to reopen the doors to former American President Donald Trump, and later, in the same way, to offer a general amnesty to other suspended accounts.

Faced with the chaos generated by the purchase and the initial decisions of Musk, European Commissioner Thierry Bretton was keen to remember that in Europe, the bird will fly according to European rules. Twitter will therefore be the first real test for the EU and the new regulatory system.

Perspectives

It is difficult to say whether the DSA will be able to represent an effective response to misinformation and in general to the regulation of the digital world. It will be necessary to wait to draw conclusions about its effectiveness and to see if the DSA will be the answer to the fateful question: how to tackle disinformation? However, it seems that this new regulation may be a first important step that finally opens to a digital management in which the public joins and regulates the private sector, which until now has managed to move in an undisturbed manner.



Translated by Cristiana Azoitei

Copyright © 2022 - Mondo Internazionale APS - Tutti i diritti riservati

Sources for this article:

https://www.article19.org/resources/eu-digital-services-act-crisis-response-must-respect-human-rights/

https://www.cer.eu/insights/will-digital-services-act-save-europe-disinformation

https://www.agendadigitale.eu/mercati-digitali/digital-services-act-cose-e-cosa-prevede-la-legge-europea-sui-servizi-digitali/

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-europe-regulation-enforcement/

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32022R2065&from=IT#d1e5398-1-1

Fonti immagini: 

https://pixabay.com/it/illustrations/notizie-false-font-testo-media-7170087/ 

Share the post

L'Autore

Giorgio Giardino

Giorgio Giardino, classe 1998, ha di recente conseguito la laurea magistrale in Politiche europee ed internazionali presso l'Università cattolica del Sacro Cuore discutendo un tesi dal titolo "La libertà di espressione nel mondo online: stato dell'arte e prospettive". Da sempre interessato a tematiche riguardanti i diritti fondamentali e le relazioni internazionali, ricopre all'interno di MI la carica di caporedattore per la sezione Diritti Umani.

Giorgio Giardino, class 1998, recently obtained a master's degree in European and international policies at Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore with a thesis entitled "Freedom of expression in the online world: state of the art and perspectives". Always interested in issues concerning fundamental rights and international relations, he holds the position of Editor-in-Chief of the Human Rights team.

Tag

disinformazione Unione Europea Twitter Fake News