![]() While Facebook and, to a slightly lesser extent, Twitter, Instagram and other popular platforms are nearly always mentioned as a spreading medium, some replies explicitly point towards an increasing importance of messaging apps in circulating Covid-related disinformation. Said differentiation between (social media) platforms and messaging services appears to play an even more important role with regard to the spread of Corona-related (dis)information. Due to the horizontal effects of human rights, the positive obligation to protect includes a duty for states to protect individuals from the actions of private parties by making intermediaries comply with relevant legal and regulatory frameworks.” This is why states, offline just as online, have both the negative obligation to refrain from violating the right to freedom of expression and other human rights in the digital environment, and the positive obligation to protect human rights and create an enabling and safe environment for everyone. When states react belatedly through laws or judgments, these may lead to overblocking or legal conflicts between competing jurisdictions. As the majority of online spaces lie in private hands, it is private law that prima facie frames many norm conflicts online. The special role of intermediaries is another challenge for regulating the internet. Companies, too, have a corporate social responsibility to respect human rights within their sphere of influence, which – on the internet – is growing rapidly as the majority of relevant communicative acts take place in private spaces. “States have a duty to protect their citizens with regard to the internet (and regarding their online activities, including the exercise of freedom of expression). ![]() ![]() KeywordsĬOVID-19, online disinformation, infodemic, platform regulation, pandemic, national contexts, governance standards The illustration above shows the first sentence of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) rendered in machine-readable barcode. “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” This study provides incentives for further rigorous studies of disinformation governance standards and their impact across different socio-cultural environments. It analyses the platforms’ willingness and efficacy in removing (presumed) disinformation, shows variances in national and local contexts and sheds light on the roles of Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Through synthesizing answers to questions submitted by more than 40 researchers from 20 countries within the GDHR Network, this exploratory study provides a first overview of how states and platforms have dealt with Corona-related disinformation. The study’s focus is on the role of states and platforms in combatting online disinformation. ![]() This study explores the spread of disinformation relating to the Covid-19 pandemic on the internet, dubbed by some as the pandemic’s accompanying “infodemic”, and the societal reactions to this development across different countries and platforms. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |