https://www.techdirt.com/2024/06/13/european-content-removal-laws-are-scrubbing-the-internet-of-completely-legal-content/ [ ] Techdirt. Free Speech [ ] * Sign In * Register * Preferences Techdirt [ ] * TechDirt * GreenHouse * Free Speech * Error 402 * Ctrl-Alt-Speech * Deals * Jobs * Support Techdirt [podcast-ti] Daily Deal: Rosetta Stone As Elon Is Asking For A $56 Billion Bonus, He's Demanding Fired Twitter Employees Pay Back Severance Fifth Circuit Handles A Library Book Removal Case And Makes A Mess Of It European Content Removal Laws Are Scrubbing The Internet Of Completely Legal Content [defamation] Free Speech from the because-of-course-this-is-how-it-would-turn-out dept Thu, Jun 13th 2024 10:59am - Tim Cushing A lot of laws have been passed in Europe that regulate the content American companies can carry. Most of these laws were passed to tamp down on speech that would be otherwise legal in the United States, but not so much in Europe where free speech rights aren't given the same sort of protections found in the US. Since most of the larger tech companies maintained overseas offices, they were subject to these laws. Those laws targeted everything from terrorist-related content to "hate speech" to whatever is currently vexing legislators. Attached to these mandates were hefty fines and the possibility of being asked to exit these countries completely. Of course, the most important law governing content takedown demands was passed much, much earlier. I'm not talking about the CDA and Section 203 immunity. No, it's a law that required no input from legislators or lobbyists. The law of unintended consequences has been in full force since the beginning of time. But it's never considered to be part of the legislative process, despite hundreds of years of precedence. So, while the consequences are unintended, they should definitely be expected. Somehow, they never are. And that brings us to this report [PDF] from The Future of Free Speech, a non-partisan think tank operating from the friendly confines of Vanderbilt University in Tennessee. (h/t Reason) Legislators in three European countries have made many content-related demands of social media services over the past decade-plus. The end result, however, hasn't been the eradication of "illegal" content, so much as it has been the eradication of speech that does not run afoul of this mesh network of takedown-focused laws. When you demand communication services respond quickly to vaguely written laws, the expected outcome is exactly what's been observed here: the proactive removal of content, a vast majority of which doesn't violate any of the laws these services are attempting to comply with. This analysis found that legal online speech made up most of the removed content from posts on Facebook and YouTube in France, Germany, and Sweden. Of the deleted comments examined across platforms and countries, between 87.5% and 99.7%, depending on the sample, were legally permissible. Equally unsurprising is this breakdown of the stats, which notes that Germany's content removal laws (which have been in place longer and are much more strict due to its zero-tolerance approach to anything Nazi-adjacent) tend to result in highest percentage of collateral damage. The highest proportion of legally permissible deleted comments was observed in Germany, where 99.7% and 98.9% of deleted comments were found to be legal on Facebook and YouTube, respectively. This could reflect the impact of the German Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) on the removal practices of social media platforms which may over-remove content with the objective of avoiding the legislation's hefty fine. In comparison, the corresponding figures for Sweden are 94.6% for both Facebook and YouTube. France has the lowest percentage of legally permissible deleted comments, with 92.1% of the deleted comments in the French Facebook sample and 87.5% of the deleted comments French YouTube sample. This isn't just a very selective sampling of content likely to be of interest to the three countries examined in this report. Nearly 1.3 million YouTube and Facebook comments were utilized for this study. It's a relatively microscopic in terms of comments generated daily by both platforms but large enough (especially when restrained to three European countries) to determine content removal patterns. The researchers discovered that more than half the comments removed by these platforms under these countries' laws were nothing more than the sort of thing that makes the internet world go round, so to speak: Among the deleted comments, the majority were classified as "general expressions of opinion." In other words, these were statements that did not contain linguistic attacks, hate speech or illegal content, such as expressing the support for a controversial candidate in the abstract. On average, more than 56% of the removed comments fall into this category. So, the question is: are these policies actually improving anything? More to the point, are they even achieving the stated goals of the laws? The researchers can't find any evidence that supports a theory that collateral damage may be acceptable if it helps these governments achieve their aims. Instead, the report suggests things will continue to get worse because the geopolitical environment is in constant flux, which means the goalposts for content moderation are similarly always in motion while the punishments for non-compliance remain unchanged. And that combination pretty much ensures what's been observed here will only get worse. [M]oderation of social media is understood by several countries as a delicate balance between freedom of expression, security, and protection of minorities. However, recent events and geopolitical developments could disrupt this perceived balance. National security concerns have caused governments to try to counter misinformation and interference from hostile nations with blunt tools. Additionally, but without making any definitive conclusions, there is some indication that legislation, such as the NetzDG, aimed at strengthening citizens and granting them certain rights, has the unintended effect of encouraging social media platforms to delete a larger fraction of legal comments. This is a preview into the potential impact of the EU's DSA now in force on freedom of expression. The report is far kinder in its observations than it probably should be. It says multiple EU governments "understand" that content moderation is a "delicate balance." That rarely seems to be the case. This report makes it clear that content moderation at scale is impossible. But when companies point this out, regulators tend to view these assertions as flimsy excuses and insist this means nothing more than tech companies just aren't trying hard enough to meet the (impossible) demands of dozens of laws and hundreds of competing interests. The takeaway from this report should be abundantly clear. But somehow adherence to the law of unintended consequences is still considered to be a constant flouting of the Unicorns Do Exist laws passed by governments that firmly believe that any decree they've issued must be possible to comply with. Otherwise they, in their infinite wisdom, wouldn't have written it in the first place. Filed Under: censorship, content removal, europe, france, free speech , germany, internet, netzdg, regulation, unintended consequences 10 CommentsLeave a Comment If you liked this post, you may also be interested in... * Meta Won't Fight Online Kid Safety Regulations Because It Sees Them As A Competitive Moat * Sixth Circuit Tells Ohio AG To Stop Blocking Ballot Initiative Calling For End Of Qualified Immunity * Ninth Circuit Dumps Lawsuit Against YouTube Brought By Anti-Vaxxer Whose Account Was Terminated * Fifth Circuit Handles A Library Book Removal Case And Makes A Mess Of It * NY's 'SAFE For Kids Act': A Lesson in How Not to Regulate The Internet * * * * * * * * * * Rate this comment as insightful Rate this comment as funny You have rated this comment as insightful You have rated this comment as funny Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam You have flagged this comment The first word has already been claimed The last word has already been claimed Lightbulb icon Laughing icon Flag icon Lightbulb icon Laughing icon Comments on "European Content Removal Laws Are Scrubbing The Internet Of Completely Legal Content" Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment * Filter comments in by Time * Filter comments as Threaded * Filter only comments rated Insightful * Filter only comments rated funny LOL * Filter only comments that are Unread 10 Comments Collapse all replies [17c2d55efd]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 11:16 am Until the EU "says" otherwise, always assume that they fucking intended the removal of these things. Oh, and unicorns do exist. They're called rhinoceroses. Collapse replies (1) Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word Threaded [2] [6067660ac0]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 11:37 am Re: I was told there was a unicorn lair in NK, was that a lie? Oh, also The NK leader got a perfect score in golf, a hole in one on all eighteen holes. Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [8153a6df16]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 11:50 am The only thing rarer than a unicorn is a competent politician... Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [ab6cdd0b7a]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 11:51 am You can't call yourself "non-partisan" when you go to bat for asshat transphobes like J.K. Rowling and pretend like Rowling's side has an actual point, which they don't. Under the new Scottish law, however, Rowling and others worry that ongoing efforts to suppress the full range of views on gender in the public sphere will be enshrined into law. The "full range of views on gender" is a cop-out phrase. It's meant to paint the side that seeks the elimination of trans people as just another viewpoint that needs to be given legitimacy and debate. And then there's this piece about how Florida's anti-DEI rules were ruled unconstitutional. Nobody in their right mind would call Florida's rules "well-intentioned", but Jacob does just that. Reading through more of their work, it's of the same "political correctness run amok" right-wing drivel that most think-tanks about speech, like The FIRE, espouse and use to get money. Collapse replies (1) Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word Threaded [2] [9ce3729067]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 12:55 pm Re: You da real MVP. Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [cf2b96bf2c]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 1:34 pm Unintended consequences... or are they? Pretty sure the consequences are intended, but it's not explicitly stated for PR reasons. It's been happening for this long, and there tend not to be laws passed afterwards to "fix" the issues, so that implies it was the purpose of the initial legislation all along. It is concerning that these laws are becoming more and more globally pervasive though. It was only what? 10, 15 years ago that people laughed at these attempts and said "okay, we'll just geographically block your country, have fun". Now that's not even considered enough. Doesn't help that encryption is also under attack. Collapse replies (1) Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word Threaded [2] [c38f213108]Anonymous Coward says: June 13, 2024 at 1:37 pm Re: Encryption is math. Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [u2515_100x0-1]ECA (profile) says: June 13, 2024 at 1:57 pm Strangest thing in the world Freedom of speech. There are So many things people DONT want to hear/see. that they Hide it in the DARK corner. They are Afraid that THEIR, interesting SIDE will show up and be seen.(dont ask about that person that ended up Hung in a jail cell) (before he could give a list of friends) This is like finding out that a Major person has been using illicit drugs to keep themselves going while in a Major political position, while being Fairly OLD(his name starts with a T). Having a freely OPEN conversation is only allowed In Private, with Friends of the same Ilk. Other wise its like a Atheist hiding in the priesthood. Why cant we all LEARN to understand WE ARE ANIMALS. And we act like them. Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [aa960474d8]Grant Gould says: June 13, 2024 at 1:57 pm Stopping giving them "unintended" The foreseeable outcome of an intentional action is not by any reasonable metric "unintended." It is at best "preemptively regretted." Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word [u15994_100x0-1]That Anonymous Coward (profile) says: June 13, 2024 at 3:49 pm That thing they were warned about happening, is happening! Its amazing, we've never ever seen tech people explain how this is a really stupid idea, they make the idea law, it bites them in the ass. Humans, how the fuck are you still alive? Reply View in chronology Make this comment the first word Make this comment the last word --------------------------------------------------------------------- says: Add Your Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here Name [ ] Email [ ] [ ]Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter URL [ ] Subject [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Comment * [ ] Comment Options: (*)Use markdown. ( )Use plain text. Make this the ( )First Word or ( )Last Word.(*)No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this? What's this? Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop >> [Post Comment][Preview] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] D[ ] Daily Deal: Rosetta Stone As Elon Is Asking For A $56 Billion Bonus, He's Demanding Fired Twitter Employees Pay Back Severance Fifth Circuit Handles A Library Book Removal Case And Makes A Mess Of It Follow Techdirt Techdirt Daily Newsletter [ ] [Subscribe] Ctrl-Alt-Speech A weekly news podcast from Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech >> Essential Reading The Techdirt Greenhouse Read the latest posts: * Winding Down Our Latest Greenhouse Panel: The Lessons Learned From SOPA/PIPA * From The Revolt Against SOPA To The EU's Upload Filters * Did We Miss Our Best Chance At Regulating The Internet? Read All >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- Trending Posts * Canada Imposes 5% Tax On Streaming To Fund Local News, Diverse Content * Microsoft Tries To Address Privacy Backlash Over New Windows 11 'Recall' Feature * Sixth Circuit Tells Ohio AG To Stop Blocking Ballot Initiative Calling For End Of Qualified Immunity Techdirt Deals Techdirt Insider Discord The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel... Loading... Become an Insider! Recent Stories Thursday 10:59 European Content Removal Laws Are Scrubbing The Internet Of Completely Legal Content (10) Tuesday 15:32 Fifth Circuit Handles A Library Book Removal Case And Makes A Mess Of It (43) More arrow x Email This Story This feature is only available to registered users. You can register here or sign in to use it. Tools & Services * Twitter * Facebook * RSS * Podcast * Research & Reports Company * About Us * Advertising Policies * Privacy Contact * Help & Feedback * Media Kit * Sponsor / Advertise More * Copia Institute * Insider Shop * Support Techdirt Techdirt Brought to you by Floor64 Proudly powered by WordPress. Hosted by Pressable. [Got it] This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy