Digital Services Law: Internet more secure, more reliable and more censored?

The new Digital Services Law that prepares the European Union (EU) It aims to ensure a safer, more reliable internet, combat hoaxes and disinformation or harmful and illegal content, but to achieve this, some voices warn that greater censorship will also be imposed.

The agreement on the new Law -which will not enter into force until 2024- was reached in Brussels on Sunday April 25 after a marathon round of negotiations and establishes the obligation that companies have (search engines, social networks, etc.) not only to moderate their content, but also to remove those that are considered illegal and to encourage their algorithms be more transparent and accessible.

The law will prohibit the collection of data on race, ideology or religious beliefs, advertisements directed at minors or so-called “dark patterns”interface design tactics aimed at tricking the user into agreeing to have their information tracked.

It also incorporates a mechanism that can be activated in the event of a crisis (such as the pandemic caused by the coronavirus Hello war in ukraine) to stop hoaxes or misinformation that could threaten public health or safety.

But some experts have warned that the rule will in fact allow social networks or governments to censor content if they consider it “harmful”, even if that content is not illegal, and have warned that it is an attack on the waterline of the freedom of expression in Europe.

Faced with those who denounce that it will be the governments or the platforms themselves who will decide what is disinformation and what is “harmful”are those who defend an open but safe and healthy Internet, in which the user has greater control of their data, and some of those parties (companies Google Y Twitterthe Internet Users Association and some of the lawyers specialized in digital law) have established their positions.

Healthier digital spaces

for a regulation “thoughtful and forward-looking” advocate Twitterwhich has underlined the importance of such regulation balancing the need to deal with the challenges “on-line” with the protection of an open internet, but has also observed that “a single approach may not respond to the diversity that characterizes” to the web world.

Sources from this company have stressed that the priority of this company – now bought by the American billionaire Elon Musk– it is “keep people safe on the platform and protect the health of the public conversation” and has therefore valued that the Digital Services Law that the EU is preparing puts the emphasis on promoting healthier digital spaces.

The social network has announced that they will continue to review in detail how the new regulations are progressing and that they want to continue collaborating with the EU institutions, with the member states, society and industry to protect the open internet and guarantee a safe environment.

also from Google have welcomed with satisfaction the objectives that have been set in the Digital Services Law so that the Internet is “safer, more transparent and responsible”but guaranteeing at the same time -says this company- that European users, creators and companies can continue to benefit from the open web.

“As the law is finalized and applied, the details will matter”sources from the search engine have indicated, who have also shown their willingness to work with legislators “to get the remaining technical details to ensure the law works for everyone”.

Not without danger

The president of the Internet Users Association (AUI), Miguel Perez Subiashas defended the need for greater transparency in the activities carried out on the network and for the user to have more control over the use of their data, and has stated that the EU agreement is “brave and complex” and it will have a great impact on the development of digital services in the coming years.

Pérez Subías has valued that transparency and control criteria are introduced so that the authorities and users can evaluate if any discrimination or manipulation occurs through the algorithms, or that clear notification and action procedures are established that facilitate user interaction. with the big platforms.

The president of the UAI has expressed his conviction that the current control and supervision mechanisms are not sufficient and has led “to the creation of large de facto oligopolies in online services that operate with great opacity”.

For the university professor and lawyer specializing in digital law Borja Adsuara what is already known about the new regulation “it is dangerous” for freedom of expression, and has pointed out that online platforms will be able to remove content that they consider “harmful” and that they incur in misinformation, even though that content is not illegal, which in his opinion is giving censorship carte blanche.

Adsuara – who is running for the position of Assistant to the Presidency in the new organization chart of the Spanish Agency for Data Protection, although the Supreme Court has provisionally suspended the appointments agreed by the PSOE and the PP – has warned that the law that prepares the EU contemplates the possibility of adopting “special measures” – he calls it “censorship” – in times of crisis (such as a health or safety threat).

The lawyer, who has observed that the agreement must still be reviewed by technicians, jurists and linguists before its approval in Parliament and in the Council, has opted for a body for the defense of freedom of expression in Europe to review the decisions that take social networks to remove content or block accounts for posting content “which may not be illegal”.

The agreement on the first draft of the European regulation on Digital Services has provoked an intense debate on social networks in recent days, and opinions and messages for or against the new regulation have occurred on the internet.

The president of the National Association of Internet Companies (ANEI), Miguel Errastihas joined the debate on the new law “which protects online rights, but which some experts believe will promote censorship”and has written on networks that express opinions on public affairs “it does not necessarily have to expose the tweeter who, due to professional activity, in such a polarized society, prefers anonymity”.