Freedom of expression is one of the cornerstones on which democracy is based. This non-exhaustive statement firmly clashes with the troubling evolution of the algorithmic society where artificial intelligence technologies govern the flow of information online according to opaque technical standards established by social media platforms. These actors are usually neither accountable nor responsible for contents uploaded or generated by the users. Nevertheless, online content moderation affects users’ fundamental rights and democratic values, especially since online platforms autonomously set standards for content removal on a global scale. Despite their crucial role in governing the flow of information online, social media platforms are not required to ensure transparency and explanation of their decision-making processes. Within this framework, this work aims to show how the liberal paradigm of protection of the right to free speech is no longer enough to protect democratic values in the digital environment, since the flow of information is actively organised by business interests, driven by profit-maximisation rather than democracy, transparency or accountability. The role of free speech is still paramount. However, the challenges raised by the algorithmic society leads to focus on enhancing the positive dimension of this fundamental right by introducing new users’ rights and transparency and accountability obligations for social media to inject democratic values in the digital environment.

De Gregorio, G. (2020). Democratising Online Content Moderation: A Constitutional Framework. COMPUTER LAW & SECURITY REPORT, 36 [10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105374].

Democratising Online Content Moderation: A Constitutional Framework

De Gregorio, G
2020

Abstract

Freedom of expression is one of the cornerstones on which democracy is based. This non-exhaustive statement firmly clashes with the troubling evolution of the algorithmic society where artificial intelligence technologies govern the flow of information online according to opaque technical standards established by social media platforms. These actors are usually neither accountable nor responsible for contents uploaded or generated by the users. Nevertheless, online content moderation affects users’ fundamental rights and democratic values, especially since online platforms autonomously set standards for content removal on a global scale. Despite their crucial role in governing the flow of information online, social media platforms are not required to ensure transparency and explanation of their decision-making processes. Within this framework, this work aims to show how the liberal paradigm of protection of the right to free speech is no longer enough to protect democratic values in the digital environment, since the flow of information is actively organised by business interests, driven by profit-maximisation rather than democracy, transparency or accountability. The role of free speech is still paramount. However, the challenges raised by the algorithmic society leads to focus on enhancing the positive dimension of this fundamental right by introducing new users’ rights and transparency and accountability obligations for social media to inject democratic values in the digital environment.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Content moderation, online platforms, digital constitutionalism, freedom of expression
English
2020
36
105374
reserved
De Gregorio, G. (2020). Democratising Online Content Moderation: A Constitutional Framework. COMPUTER LAW & SECURITY REPORT, 36 [10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105374].
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
G. De Gregorio - Democratising Content Moderation.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Dimensione 742.09 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
742.09 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/282633
Citazioni
  • Scopus 36
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 30
Social impact