This article was originally published in English
Telegram CEO Pavel Durov was arrested and charged in France for a series of offenses related to his platform, and in the same week, Elon Musk’s X platform was banned in Brazil.
ADVERTISEMENT
The arrest and indictment of Pavel Dourov, PDG from Telegram, as he got off his private jet in France last week, followeda few days later by the blocking in Brazil of Elon Musk’s social media platform X, constitute a first, with regulators getting tougher on social networks and blaming their bosses.
These two incidents could mark a new chapter for social networks, particularly in Europe.
Charges brought against Pavel Durov in France there are twelve of themamong which:“complicity in the organized distribution of child pornography images of minors, drug trafficking, organized fraud” et “refusal to cooperate with the authorities with regard to information or documents necessary for the carrying out and exploitation of interceptions authorized by law.”
“His arrest is not a watershed moment for social media per se, but it is an important moment for social media regulation in Europe.”Yevgeniy Golovchenko, assistant professor at the Department of Political Science at the University of Copenhagen, told Euronews Next.
“This is not the first time that there has been friction between Telegram and the authorities”he added, referring to a fine imposed by Germany after the country accused the platform of breaking its laws and facilitating hate speech.
The question raised by Mr Durov’s case, Mr Golovchenko said, is to what extent European countries can or cannot enforce their existing laws.
“We can imagine a scenario in which Telegram complies with the law, but we can also imagine that Durov does not comply..”
“That’s why it’s not just about Telegram or French legislation, because legislators in Europe and around the world are probably looking at this very closely.”he said.
In Europe, the Digital Services Act (DSA), which has been in force for six months, contains provisions that can hold platform owners liable. However, Telegram does not fall within the scope of the DSA for very large platforms, as it has fewer than 45 million monthly users. Telegram currently has 41 million users in Europe.
“The Telegram case could give a greater role to EU delegated acts, which can amend non-essential parts of legislation”said Catalina Goanta, associate professor of private law and technology at Utrecht University.
This would ensure that there is transparency and clarity in terms of which platforms fall under which provisions, she told Euronews Next.
Should we expect “more aggressive approaches” ?
Musk’s platform, X, beyond its ban in Brazil, faces increased scrutiny in the EU.
The European Commission said in July that the platform was violating ASN rules regarding its blue tick, claiming it was misleading users. Mr Musk has refuted these findings.
“I think the European Commission is going to have to make a strategic choice: are we going to wage war on Twitter? Or do we just want to find an agreement that will be useful?”Mr Goanta said.
X and Telegram have also been criticised by the British government for fuelling far-right riots in August that incited hatred against Muslims.
ADVERTISEMENT
“I think if we assume that more aggressive approaches are going to be taken, then we could see Elon Musk not being able to travel to the UK and Twitter being blocked in Europe.”Mr Goanta said.
“And I think that would be undesirable in many ways.”she said.
Elon Musk has also been accused on several occasions of making defamatory remarks against certain people.
This raises the question of whether a CEO should be held liable for defamation, “or if we are really talking about someone who incites hatred or violence”Ms Goanta said.
ADVERTISEMENT
She stressed, however, that the cases of Musk and Durov in the EU and in France were not the same, as there are different categories of criminal laws that deal with, for example, hosting child pornography versus terrorist content.
There are also very specific laws on cryptography that are unique to France.
Freedom of expression versus illegal speech
The argument that regulators are attacking free speech in the cases of Musk and Durov has been preached by tech giants and their supporters.
“X is the most used source of information in Brazil. This is what people want”Elon Musk wrote in a message on his platform.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Now the tyrant Voldemort crushes the people’s right to free speech.”he added, referring to the Brazilian judge who ordered the platform banned after Musk refused to appoint a legal representative in Brazil in August.
The Durov and Musk cases show that regulation is coming, according to William Echikson, editor of the online technology policy journal Bandwidth at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).
“These big tech companies aren’t kids anymore. They’re grown-ups.”he told Euronews Next.
The difficult question for regulation, he said, is how to balance free speech with objectionable speech.
ADVERTISEMENT
“We have different responses in the United States and in Europe. The tricky question is what is effective. It is very difficult to know how to control these kinds of things effectively.”he said.
In the United States, the First Amendment protects the right to free speech, which means that it is much more difficult to regulate speech than in Europe. However, Europe is also divided, with different rules from country to country.
“I think the line between acceptable and unacceptable in terms of expression is very blurred,” Mr. Echikson said.
However, he added that in democracies, platforms cannot be held responsible for not preventing anything, because that “could lead to internet censorship, like in China or Russia. I don’t think that’s what we want in the West.”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Will things change?
Although Telegram is a “example of bad behavior”he doesn’t think Elon Musk or other social media bosses will be arrested anytime soon.
What could change social media, he says, is that these records, which are bad for business, could discourage advertisers from being associated “to a toxic cesspool.”
Reddit is a prime example. The community site was once filled with racist and misogynistic groups, but the company began moderating and removing those groups. This year, the 19-year-old company went through an initial public offering (IPO) and has since gained trust from users.
“I think the bottom-up method of moderation and the presence of volunteer editors, as in the case of Wikipedia, is probably a more effective model than waiting for regulators in Brussels to determine what is acceptable and what is not.”Mr. Echikson said.
ADVERTISEMENT
For Robin Mansell, professor of new media and the internet at the London School of Economics and Political Science, much of the talk about free speech from tech titans “concerns freedom of expression without responsibility”.
But she doesn’t think the cases will change much for social media or tech giants in the United States or Europe.
“I’m not convinced that this will have a big impact on social media. I think the only thing that will have a big impact on these companies is the American legislators if they decide to do something about it.”she told Euronews Next.
“And I think it depends entirely on the results of the upcoming US elections. In the meantime, the European Union will continue to express its concern,” she added.
ADVERTISEMENT
