It is more than four years since the main technology platforms have signed a voluntary pan-European code of conduct on the illegal seizure of hate speech. Yesterday, the European Commission latest rating from a legally non-binding agreement, “generally positive” results are praised – 90% of the tagged content was evaluated within 24 hours, and 71% of the content found to be illegal, incited hate speech. Last compared to 28% in 2016.
However, the reporting cards say that platforms still lack transparency. They also do not provide users with adequate feedback on the removal of hate speech in Commission Opinion,
The platforms responded and provided feedback on 67.1% of the notifications received on the report card – compared with 65.4% in the previous study. Only Facebook systematically informs users, while the Commission notes: “All other platforms should be improved.”
In another criticism, his assessment of the performance of the platforms when working with hate speech reports revealed inconsistencies in their assessment processes — with “separate and comparable” ratings of tagged content that were carried out at different periods of time, showing “discrepancies” in how they were processed. ,
Subscribers to the code of hate speech on the Internet are: Dailymotion, Facebook, Google+, Instagram, Jeuxvideo.com, Microsoft, Snapchat, Twitter and YouTube.
This is the fifth biennial evaluation of the code. Perhaps this is not a final assessment, but the views of EU lawmakers are firmly focused on the wider legislative process – when the commissioners are busy counseling on and the development of a package of measures to update laws related to digital services.
The draft of this Digital Services Act is due to be submitted by the end of the year, and the commissioners are making it clear that they will update the rules regarding online liability and try to determine the responsibilities of the platform in relation to content.
It is therefore not surprising that this is currently a code of hate speech that feeds this broader legislative process, while self-regulation efforts seem to be coming to an end.
Signatories are also clearly not integrated view of the platform strip these days. There is neither WhatsApp, for example, nor TikTok (which just signed up for a separate EU Code of Practice aimed at misinformation). But this is hardly relevant if legal restrictions are developed on illegal online content – and are likely to be applied everywhere.
Commenting on a statement to Vera Jourova, vice president of the Commission on Values and Transparency, she said: “The Code of Conduct remains a success story when it comes to countering illegal hate speech on the Internet. He proposed urgent improvements with full respect for fundamental rights. He has created valuable partnerships between civil society organizations, national authorities, and IT platforms. Now it’s time to ensure that all platforms have the same obligations throughout the Single Market, and clarify in law the obligations of platforms to ensure the safety of users on the Internet. What is illegal offline remains illegal online. ”
In another supporting statement, Didier Rainders, Commissioner of Justice, added: “The upcoming Digital Services Act will make a difference. It will create a European basis for digital services and complement existing EU actions to curb illegal hate speech on the Internet. The Commission will also consider adopting mandatory transparency measures for platforms to clarify how they deal with illegal hate speech on their platforms. ”
At the beginning of the monthAt a briefing that discussed the Commission’s efforts to combat online disinformation, Yurova suggested that lawmakers be prepared some stringent legal restrictions online where it comes to illegal content Journalists: “In the Digital Services Law, you will probably see regulatory measures against illegal content – because what is illegal offline should be clearly illegal on the Internet, and platforms should actively work in this direction.” Disinformation is unlikely to receive the same treatment, she suggested.
Currently, the Commission has also made it clear that it will consider ways to encourage all platforms that engage in illegal hate speech to create “effective notification and action systems”.
Furthermore, it says he will continue – this year and next year – to work to facilitate dialogue between platforms and civil society organizations that focus on combating illegal hate speech, saying he especially wants to promote “engagement with moderation groups content, and understanding about the local legal characteristics of hate speech ”
In his own way report Last year, evaluating the code of conduct, the Commission concluded that it had contributed to “quick progress”, especially with regard to “quick review and removal of hate speech content”.
He also suggested that as a result of these efforts, “trust and cooperation between IT companies, civil society organizations and the authorities of the Member States increased in the form of a structured process of mutual learning and knowledge sharing,” noting that the platforms reported “a significant expansion of their network.” “Trusted flags” in Europe since 2016. “
“Transparency and feedback are also important to ensure that users can appeal against a decision made regarding the content that they have posted, as well as to protect their right to freedom of speech,” the Commission’s report states that Facebook reported about receiving 1.1 million hits. related to incitement to hate speech between January 2019 and March 2019, and that 130,000 pieces of content were restored “after reassessment”.
Regarding the volume of hate speech, the Commission suggested that the number of notifications about the content of hate speech be approximately 17-30% of the total content, noting, for example, that Facebook reported that it removed 3.3 million Content Units for violating the hate speech policy. the last quarter of 2018 and 4M in the first quarter of 2019.
“Ecosystems of hate speech on the Internet and the extent of this phenomenon in Europe remain an area where additional research and data are needed,” the report said.