Should gatekeepers silence a US president? (teaser)

SIGN UP TO MEDIASPACE.GLOBAL HERE TO WATCH THE FULL VIDEO.

Mediaspace.global just hosted a live debate on the pros and cons of social media gatekeepers wielding the kind of power that can effectively gag a president. The burning issue of social media regulation has not faded away, with Trump’s departure, as the new Biden administration is already facing calls to crack down while the European Union is keen on Europe-wide regulation instead of a patchwork of laws. Experienced media, legal and tech experts chipped in on the lively and exclusive discussion.

The key takeaway is that the issue of banning or suspending Donald Trump-’s social media account by big-tech social media companies calls attention to the unclear rules governing social media players.

This case is sure to spark a long-running debate that might turn into a regulation tsunami: “Should this be regulated, and by whom?” Oliver Bretz, Partner at Euclid Law asks.

While some experts are worried about the power of big-tech social media, others believe big-tech companies -- as private companies -- are allowed to form and follow their own policies. “Obviously I am not and was not a Trump supporter, politically speaking, but I’m absolutely not happy about what happened with his ability to speak,” said Krisztina Rozgonyi, policy and regulatory expert - media and communication, Assistant Professor, University of Vienna.

“Twitter is not censoring anything, Twitter is a private platform, it’s private property. They have rights to create their own moderation rules,” added Jay Modrall, partner at Norton Rose, Fulbright's Brussels Office.

The seriousness of the issue is probably the only thing on which all speakers agree. Should social media platforms act on the speech or speakers, and is there an alternative to banning? Do we need verified social media accounts to identify people or is it dangerous in non-democratic countries? Are we speaking about censorship in the Twitter ban on @RealDonaldTrump or not?

And as Mohammad J Sear, EY Associate Partner, Digital Gov. & Public Sector Advisory Services, MENA, points out: what is more important: freedom of speech or protection of people? He said: “I wouldn’t go as far as to say regulations to the point where they become draconian and you can’t even really allow for freedom. For me it’s about freedom of speech versus protection of people.”

Experts also debated whether it should be government intervention or professional bodies who set the new rules? Global or regional, and with local interventions required?

Lubos Kuklis, Board Member, European Regulators Group for Audio Visual Media Services said: “I think we need a robust kind of regulation where you have all the protections there.”

Stephen Kinsella, EU Lawyer, Specialist Partner at Flint Global, and founder of Clean Up The Internet, said: “I’m not happy entirely with the top-down approach from the European Commission but it’s possibly the best we’ve got for the moment. But I hope between us we come up with smarter solutions.”

Watch the full, member exclusive video by here and join the conversation!

Votes: 0
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of mediaspace.global to add comments!

Join mediaspace.global