The next European Commission needs to address information power

Ahead of a new European Commission, following June’s European elections, ARTICLE 19’s Mark Dempsey outlines a vision for a European Union where the information environment is open, decentralised, fair, diverse, and inclusive.

Mark Dempsey is a senior EU advocacy officer at the free speech organisation ARTICLE 19, which combines advocacy, research, campaigning, and cutting-edge legal analysis to strengthen people’s right to free expression and access to information.

The overriding theme of ARTICLE 19’s recommendations for the 2024-2029 European Commission is information integrity. With elections in over 50 countries this year, it is unsurprising that information integrity has become the mot du jour in policy and political circles, both within the narrow confines of the so-called Brussels bubble and beyond.

Our manifesto follows the publication of seven key priority calls for online platforms during elections; calls we see as essential for platforms to fulfil their responsibilities to safeguard free expression and integrity of elections and the broader democratic process.

For the new term, we urge the incoming Commission to focus its energies on effective implementation and enforcement of existing legislation applicable to the digital communication environment, particularly the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), the Digital Services Act (DSA), the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), and the Anti-SLAPPs Directive.

Addressing information power is key for democracy

The problem of concentration of power is particularly extreme in social media markets with consequential impacts on freedom of expression, high barriers to entry and gatekeeping.

Effective implementation of the DMA will not only help address this concentration, but may open social media networks to intra-platform competition.

Providing people with a choice in a variety of digital markets can finally break the stranglehold of the gatekeepers which have for so long determined both innovation and quality standards, including those on fundamental rights. People must have viable alternatives and regain some bargaining power towards the supply side of the market.

Equally, effective and consistent enforcement of the DSA is a further, vital means of keeping the democratic process in check during this super election year.

Clarity on the risks to democracy, society and individuals and the provisions which provide for access to data by researchers are key accountability mechanisms against which the DSA will be measured if it is to live up to its promise of meaningful platform transparency.

As regards the AI Act, together with other civil society organisations, we have expressed our criticism that the Act fails to set a gold standard for human rights protection.

We would urge that for the next term, the Commission supports the implementation and enforcement of rights-based safeguards and red lines, including banning technologies that are fundamentally incompatible with international human rights standards, such as emotion recognition.

Interplay between internet infrastructure and human rights 

The growing ownership of internet infrastructure by Big Tech is reinforcing their chokehold across society.

A new Commission should consider the human rights implications of infrastructure technologies (amongst others, IoT, cloud services, CDNs, data security, DNS) when monitoring the implementation and enforcement of regulatory frameworks for infrastructure providers.

A pivotal moment for media freedom and protection of journalists 

Journalists have rarely been in so much danger than today, be it the increasing numbers being killed in conflict environments, or the growing number of SLAPP lawsuits being issued against them. And all in a market with increasing media concentration and the rising power of a few digital platforms.

The passing of the EMFA and the Anti-SLAPPs Directive are important steps to increase the protection of media independence, pluralism, and journalists across the EU. The EMFA does not go as far as we would have liked (e.g. no requirement for large social media platforms to unbundle hosting and content curation).

We look forward to providing technical legal assistance to the newly established European Board for Media Services and specifically in helping with guidelines for the implementation of Article 21 (‘media pluralism test’).

As regards the Anti-SLAPPs Directive, ARTICLE 19, working closely with many organisations under the auspices of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE) welcomed the Directive as setting a minimum standard’.

The onus is now on member states to draft effective legislation that includes, inter alia, robust guarantees in terms of the early dismissal mechanism to filter out SLAPPs. We also urge the European Commission to provide support for the training of judges, lawyers, and journalists in member states.

A more transparent Commission with more involvement from civil society 

Within the opaque confines of the final negotiations (trilogue) for legislative proposals between the EU institutions, the Council once again significantly weakened legislative texts from the European Parliament which reflected hard-fought battles to ensure sufficient fundamental rights protections.

A new Commission needs to be more transparent to the public by improving access to information and demonstrating transparency more broadly.

Increased transparency can also be reflected in the expansion of the role of CSOs in the implementation and enforcement of legislation and where there are extensive resources which, when mapped out according to expertise on a case-by-case basis, can fill a significant gap for the Commission and complement internal capacity.

Lastly, as a global organisation, we urge a new Commission to play a central role beyond the EU at multilateral and multi-stakeholder fora to promote an open, decentralised, fair, pluralistic, diverse, resilient, and inclusive information environment globally.