谎言、责任和合法内容:批评欧盟处理网络虚假信息的方法

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Ethan Shattock
{"title":"谎言、责任和合法内容:批评欧盟处理网络虚假信息的方法","authors":"Ethan Shattock","doi":"10.54648/cola2023094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article considers legislative approaches to online disinformation in the European Union (EU) and identifies how shifting approaches could undermine applicable fundamental rights standards in the disinformation field. The problem of online disinformation – and its disruptive effects on European elections – has attracted extensive scrutiny at the EU institutional and Member State level. Since 2018, Union institutions have pursued self-regulatory measures for disinformation and have explicitly refrained from including this content in the EU’s intermediary liability regime. A key justification for this approach has been that disinformation generally includes lawful content and that restrictions on lawful content may undermine the right to freedom of expression. As this article maps, however, standards are shifting in the EU legal context regarding online intermediary responsibilities to limit the dissemination of content containing disinformation. This is not only evidenced by a diverse set of Member State laws designed to address misleading electoral communications, but also in several provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) which have potential applications in this area. Drawing from relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), this article provides a distillation of key European standards regarding how EU and Member State laws to combat disinformation must ensure compatibility with the right to freedom of expression. This article further considers whether – in light of these standards – divergent legislative approaches to online disinformation in the EU could undermine fundamental rights.\nDisinformation, Freedom of Expression, CFR, Free Elections, Democracy","PeriodicalId":47406,"journal":{"name":"Common Market Law Review","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lies, liability, and lawful content: Critiquing the approaches to online disinformation in the EU\",\"authors\":\"Ethan Shattock\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/cola2023094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article considers legislative approaches to online disinformation in the European Union (EU) and identifies how shifting approaches could undermine applicable fundamental rights standards in the disinformation field. The problem of online disinformation – and its disruptive effects on European elections – has attracted extensive scrutiny at the EU institutional and Member State level. Since 2018, Union institutions have pursued self-regulatory measures for disinformation and have explicitly refrained from including this content in the EU’s intermediary liability regime. A key justification for this approach has been that disinformation generally includes lawful content and that restrictions on lawful content may undermine the right to freedom of expression. As this article maps, however, standards are shifting in the EU legal context regarding online intermediary responsibilities to limit the dissemination of content containing disinformation. This is not only evidenced by a diverse set of Member State laws designed to address misleading electoral communications, but also in several provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) which have potential applications in this area. Drawing from relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), this article provides a distillation of key European standards regarding how EU and Member State laws to combat disinformation must ensure compatibility with the right to freedom of expression. This article further considers whether – in light of these standards – divergent legislative approaches to online disinformation in the EU could undermine fundamental rights.\\nDisinformation, Freedom of Expression, CFR, Free Elections, Democracy\",\"PeriodicalId\":47406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Common Market Law Review\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Common Market Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2023094\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Common Market Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2023094","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lies, liability, and lawful content: Critiquing the approaches to online disinformation in the EU
This article considers legislative approaches to online disinformation in the European Union (EU) and identifies how shifting approaches could undermine applicable fundamental rights standards in the disinformation field. The problem of online disinformation – and its disruptive effects on European elections – has attracted extensive scrutiny at the EU institutional and Member State level. Since 2018, Union institutions have pursued self-regulatory measures for disinformation and have explicitly refrained from including this content in the EU’s intermediary liability regime. A key justification for this approach has been that disinformation generally includes lawful content and that restrictions on lawful content may undermine the right to freedom of expression. As this article maps, however, standards are shifting in the EU legal context regarding online intermediary responsibilities to limit the dissemination of content containing disinformation. This is not only evidenced by a diverse set of Member State laws designed to address misleading electoral communications, but also in several provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) which have potential applications in this area. Drawing from relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), this article provides a distillation of key European standards regarding how EU and Member State laws to combat disinformation must ensure compatibility with the right to freedom of expression. This article further considers whether – in light of these standards – divergent legislative approaches to online disinformation in the EU could undermine fundamental rights. Disinformation, Freedom of Expression, CFR, Free Elections, Democracy
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
30.40%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: The Common Market Law Review has provided a forum for the keenest legal minds in the fields for more than 40 years. Because of the international composition of its Editorial Board, and in view of the fact that it is able to attract contributions from all over Europe, and from the United States, the Review is able to adopt a unique approach to capitilize Community issues. Each issue contains articles dealing with matters of current interest; the authoritative treatment given to each topic ensures lasting juridical value. This pre-eminent journal brings you detailed, in-depth examination of the most pressing and far-reaching issues on Community Law.
×
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