European Union’s Regulating of Social Media: A Discourse Analysis of the Digital Services Act

IF 2.5 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
G. Schlag
{"title":"European Union’s Regulating of Social Media: A Discourse Analysis of the Digital Services Act","authors":"G. Schlag","doi":"10.17645/pag.v11i3.6735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditional conceptions of democratic publics are changing due to the rise of social media as a global communication tool. While social media brings people together globally and creates new spaces for creativity and resistance, it is also a space of harassment, discrimination, and violence. As recent debates about hate speech and the distribution of “fake news” have shown, the political responsibilities and consequences of regulating online content remain unclear. More recently, the EU is increasingly paying attention to platform providers. How is the EU legitimizing its new approach to social media platform regulation and how will this legislation shape transnational publics? This article contributes to ongoing debates on platform regulation by governments and other political authorities (especially the EU as a transnational legislator) and discussions about the shape of online publics. By applying a discourse analytical perspective, key legitimation narratives can be explored. I argue that the EU claims political authority over corporate interests by introducing new legislation to regulate social media platforms with the Digital Services Act. On the one hand, the EU imagines an idealized democratic online public without harmful and illegal content. On the other hand, the new legislation serves the EU’s agenda on digital sovereignty, taking back control from big and US-based enterprises. There is a strong consensus about four legitimation narratives: (a) “What is illegal offline has to be illegal online”; (b) the EU is “taking back control”; (c) the EU is “protecting small businesses, consumers, and our citizens against big tech”; (d) the EU is developing “a golden standard and rulebook beyond the EU.” Held together by the idea of democratic procedures, authority, and sovereignty, these narratives are demanding more action from social media providers to act on harmful and illegal content.","PeriodicalId":51598,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i3.6735","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Traditional conceptions of democratic publics are changing due to the rise of social media as a global communication tool. While social media brings people together globally and creates new spaces for creativity and resistance, it is also a space of harassment, discrimination, and violence. As recent debates about hate speech and the distribution of “fake news” have shown, the political responsibilities and consequences of regulating online content remain unclear. More recently, the EU is increasingly paying attention to platform providers. How is the EU legitimizing its new approach to social media platform regulation and how will this legislation shape transnational publics? This article contributes to ongoing debates on platform regulation by governments and other political authorities (especially the EU as a transnational legislator) and discussions about the shape of online publics. By applying a discourse analytical perspective, key legitimation narratives can be explored. I argue that the EU claims political authority over corporate interests by introducing new legislation to regulate social media platforms with the Digital Services Act. On the one hand, the EU imagines an idealized democratic online public without harmful and illegal content. On the other hand, the new legislation serves the EU’s agenda on digital sovereignty, taking back control from big and US-based enterprises. There is a strong consensus about four legitimation narratives: (a) “What is illegal offline has to be illegal online”; (b) the EU is “taking back control”; (c) the EU is “protecting small businesses, consumers, and our citizens against big tech”; (d) the EU is developing “a golden standard and rulebook beyond the EU.” Held together by the idea of democratic procedures, authority, and sovereignty, these narratives are demanding more action from social media providers to act on harmful and illegal content.
欧盟对社交媒体的监管:《数字服务法》的话语分析
由于社交媒体作为全球交流工具的兴起,传统的民主公众概念正在发生变化。虽然社交媒体将全球的人们聚集在一起,为创造力和抵抗创造了新的空间,但它也是骚扰、歧视和暴力的空间。正如最近关于仇恨言论和“假新闻”传播的辩论所显示的那样,监管在线内容的政治责任和后果仍不明朗。最近,欧盟越来越关注平台提供商。欧盟如何使其社交媒体平台监管的新方法合法化?这项立法将如何影响跨国公众?本文有助于政府和其他政治当局(特别是作为跨国立法者的欧盟)正在进行的关于平台监管的辩论以及关于在线公众形态的讨论。通过运用话语分析的视角,可以探索关键的合法化叙事。我认为,欧盟通过引入新的立法,以《数字服务法案》(Digital Services Act)来监管社交媒体平台,从而宣称其政治权威高于企业利益。一方面,欧盟想象一个理想化的民主网络公众,没有有害和非法的内容。另一方面,新立法为欧盟的数字主权议程服务,从美国的大企业手中夺回控制权。人们对四种正当化叙述有着强烈的共识:(a)“线下非法的东西在网上也必须是非法的”;(b)欧盟正在“收回控制权”;(c)欧盟正在“保护小企业、消费者和我们的公民免受大型科技公司的侵害”;(d)欧盟正在制定“欧盟以外的黄金标准和规则手册”。在民主程序、权威和主权的理念下,这些叙事要求社交媒体提供商采取更多行动,对有害和非法内容采取行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Politics and Governance
Politics and Governance POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Politics and Governance is an innovative offering to the world of online publishing in the Political Sciences. An internationally peer-reviewed open access journal, Politics and Governance publishes significant, cutting-edge and multidisciplinary research drawn from all areas of Political Science. Its central aim is thereby to enhance the broad scholarly understanding of the range of contemporary political and governing processes, and impact upon of states, political entities, international organizations, communities, societies and individuals, at international, regional, national and local levels. Submissions that focus upon the political or governance-based dynamics of any of these levels or units of analysis in way that interestingly and effectively brings together conceptual analysis and empirical findings are welcome. Politics and Governance is committed to publishing rigorous and high-quality research. To that end, it undertakes a meticulous editorial process, providing both the academic and policy-making community with the most advanced research on contemporary politics and governance. The journal is an entirely open-access online resource, and its in-house publication process enables it to swiftly disseminate its research findings worldwide, and on a regular basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信