EU Set to Take on Big Tech with New Digital Services Act

Over the past two decades, the process of digitisation has completely transformed the European services sector, though EU legislation regulating the provision of those services has not kept up with the fast-changing technological environment. With consensus among European policymakers that the 20-year-old piece of legislation, the e-Commerce Directive, was in dire need of updating, the European Commission announced in January 2020 that it would pass a new Digital Services Act by the end of 2020. That date, expected to be December 2, is rapidly approaching.

With this brand new set of regulations governing the EU’s digital market, the Commission intends to clarify and introduce new digital services liability rules and ensure a more competitive digital market where even small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) can compete with the more established players.

Policymakers in the EU, which is already home to the world’s strictest data privacy laws, believe that Europe is in a unique position to set new standards for the regulation of digital services for the whole world. The forthcoming rules represent an unprecedented strike against the seemingly limitless power of big tech, which are likely to oppose the reforms.

A close-up image shows the slogan of the ‘StopHateForProfit’ campaign on the organization’s website displayed on a smartphone screen in Cologne, Germany, 29 June 2020. EPA-EFE/SASCHA STEINBACH

What new rules are coming?  

Although the final contours of the legislative package are not yet public knowledge, it is expected that the regulation will come in two legislative proposals. The first set of proposals contained in the Digital Services Act will likely focus on updating digital services providers’ responsibilities and liabilities. The Digital Markets Act will then likely be concerned with limiting the power of big platforms in general.

In a recent speech, Executive Vice-President of the Commission Margrethe Vestager said that digital media platforms need to be more transparent about the way they share the digital world that we see.

“They’ll have to report on what they’ve done to take down illegal material. They’ll have to tell us how they decide what information and products to recommend to us, and which ones to hide – and give us the ability to influence those decisions, instead of simply having them made for us. And they’ll have to tell us who’s paying for the ads that we see, and why we’ve been targeted by a certain ad,” Vestager said earlier this year.

Although it is not year clear which specific platforms will be targeted, it is widely expected that the new rules with mainly apply to social media platforms with more than 2 million users, which have, until now, bitterly resisted attempts to disclose their algorithms.

“Platforms need to ensure that their users can be protected from illegal goods and content online, by putting in place the right processes to react swiftly to illegal activities, and to cooperate with law enforcement authorities more effectively,” the Commission’s press officer for the digital economy, Charles Manoury, told BIRN an email.

When asked about the concrete rules being considered in Brussels, Manoury said that the Commission will “aim to harmonise a clear set of obligations (responsibilities) for online platforms, including notice-and-action procedures, redress, transparency and accountability measures, and cooperation obligations.”

In a report produced by the European Parliamentary Research Service in October, EU experts came up with the following recommendations for the Commission:

  1. Introduce a clear, standardised notice-and-action procedures to deal with illegal and harmful content;
  2. Enhanced transparency on content curation and reporting obligations for platforms;
  3. Out-of-court dispute settlement on content management, particularly on notice-and-action procedures.

Those policy recommendations are strikingly similar to the rules already in effect in the country currently holding the Presidency of the Council of the EU – Germany.

A Google logo is displayed at the Google offices in Berlin, Germany, 24 June 2019. EPA-EFE/HAYOUNG JEON

German lessons

 “The Commission in its impact assessments takes into account already existing EU laws, such as the NetzDG,” noted the Commission’s spokesman Manoury, referring to the Network Enforcement Act, which was passed by the German parliament back in 2017.

According to the website of the German Ministry of Justice and and Consumer Protection, the law aims to fight hate crime and criminally punish fake news and other unlawful content on social networks more effectively. This includes insults, malicious gossip, defamation, public incitement to crime, incitement to hatred, disseminating portrayals of violence and threatening the commission of a felony.

In practice, all social media platforms (with more than 2 million users) that are accessible in Germany are obliged to take down or block access to “manifestly unlawful content” within 24 hours of receiving a complaint. They also have to offer their users an accessible procedure for reporting criminally punishable content and take “immediate notice” of any content that might violate German criminal law.

But German lawmakers didn’t stop there. In June this year, the Budestag decided to tighten further the laws against hate speech online by requiring social networks to report to the BKA (Federal Police) and transmit some user data, such as IP addresses or port numbers, directly to the authorities.

Moreover, new rules will oblige operators of social networks to submit biannual reports on their handling of complaints about criminally punishable content. These reports must contain information, for example, on the volume of complaints and the decision-making practices of the network, as well as about the teams responsible for processing reported content. They must be made available to everybody on the internet.

Social media platforms could be liable for fines of up to 50 million euros if they fail on their reporting duties, according to a statement from the Justice Ministry.

According to the German daily Stuttgarter Zeitung, so far nine social media platforms have offered transparency reports: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, Tiktok, Soundcloud, Change.org and Google+. The number of complaints varies greatly. In the second half of 2019, 4,274 unsatisfied users reported to Facebook. There were 843,527 complaints on Twitter and 277,478 on YouTube. Facebook felt compelled to take action in almost a quarter of the cases. 87 per cent of these posts were deleted within 24 hours, a total of 488. Twitter took care of 16 per cent of the complaints, 86 per cent of which were removed from the network within a day, according to the German newspaper.

However, the new obligations have their critics. Some express concern that legal content will end up being deleted by overzealous platforms eager to avoid paying hefty fines, the so-called problem of “over-blocking”. In 2017, when the law was first passed by the German parliament, even journalism unions in Germany protested against it, fearing a new form of censorship.

Reacting to the criticisms, German Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht recently called for the introduction of a “counter-presentation procedure”, which would give authors of deleted content the right to ask social networks for a reassessment of their decision before any fines would be imposed.

There is also criticism that some of the proposed rules might even be in conflict with the German constitution. This particularly concerns the law intended to combat far-right extremism and hate crime, which was passed in the summer and is intended to force operators of social networks to report criminal content such as the threat of dangerous bodily harm or defamation of public figures (mayors or municipal councillors) to the Federal Criminal Police Office. It is because of those concerns that the president has not yet signed the law.

Long way to go

The German experience clearly shows that certain measures to combat the spread of hate speech and other form of illegal content online are relatively easy to implement, while others, like direct reporting to the police, might take much longer to build a consensus around.

That being said, even when it comes to the seemingly more trivial measures, the European Commission’s mission is an infinitely more challenging one. First of all, it needs to make all member states agree on what even constitutes a hate crime on the internet. Then it has to create a set of rules that would be applicable across all member states.

According to a source in the European Commission familiar with the legislation, the first task is the easier one. “There is actually a very broad agreement across the EU on the question of illegal content. Basically, what is illegal offline is also illegal online – it is just a question of how you monitor it and what measures to take to make sure that the rules are followed also online,” the source, who wished to remain anonymous, told BIRN.

Whatever the rules that the Commission ends up proposing in early December, the speed of the final implementation of those measures will largely depend on the legal form of the rules.

Generally speaking, if the rules assume the form of EU regulations, the final implementation might take a very long time, as regulations need unilateral agreement by all member states. If EU legislators decide to go with directives, which leave a lot of space for individual member states to translate into their own respective national laws and don’t require unilateral agreement, things could go much faster.

According to the source from the Commission, half a year is an absolute minimum to expect the legislative process to take.

“If you have an extremely well-drafted piece of legislation that everyone agrees on, it can take half a year. I’ve never heard about anything going faster than this. It is already clear that this will not be very straightforward,” the source said.

Pandemic Pushes Slovakia to Finally Target Disinformation

Standing on the blue-backed stage of the Globsec Forum in Bratislava on October 7, wearing an elegant black mask coordinated with her dress, Slovak President Zuzana Caputova addressed the main challenges that the pandemic poses to the world and the rule of law.

“It has exposed the real capacities and limitations of our crisis management, which has rested in peace for years,” she said. “Once again, we have seen that the spread of disinformation and hoaxes can be deadly,” she added, pinpointing one of the most pressing issues for her country.

Slovakia has been battling hybrid threats and disinformation for years, with most of the fighting falling on the shoulders of non-governmental activists and information and security experts. This year, however, the destructive power of disinformation manifested itself palpably for the first time.

“Slovakia is not doing a very good job in battling the pandemic at the moment,” admitted Marek Krajci, the Slovak health minister, on October 9, explaining the ever-growing numbers of new COVID-19 cases in the country. “I think the huge disinformation campaign is reflected in the bad results that we’re seeing right now.”

Another major manifestation of the frustration and anger caused by disinformation about COVID was witnessed at the weekend, when hundreds of people joined an unannounced and illegal protest in Bratislava, organised by football hooligans and neo-Nazi groups. Attacking the iron gate of the governmental office compound, they chanted vulgar slogans about the prime minister, threw stones at the police and called for people to ignore the new restrictive measures designed to combat the virus.

While during the first wave of the pandemic Slovakia saw itself as a “winner” of the crisis, largely thanks to the responsible behaviour of the general public, strict early measures and obligatory masks, this autumn has brought a much stronger second wave than the country feared.

According to opinion polls, people in Slovakia are unsure what information about coronavirus they can trust, support for government-mandated restrictive measures has decreased significantly and, ultimately, so has their trust in government leaders.

“It would be easy to blame the media or education systems or the internet for the erosion of citizens’ confidence, but do political leaders today project trust?” President Caputova asked rhetorically at Globsec, opening an important question for her own country, too.

Slovak President Zuzana Caputova gives the opening address at the Globsec Bratislava Forum 2020. Photo: Globsec

A good start, but a long way to go

The new Slovak government that came into office in March defined countering disinformation and hybrid threats as one of its main goals for the next four years. In its manifesto, Igor Matovic‘s government named the fight against disinformation as a priority in foreign politics, defence, education and the media.

“The spreading of disinformation and hoaxes endangers the development of a knowledge-based society,” said the program of the new government. “The Government of SR will prepare an action plan for coordinating the fight against hybrid threats and spreading of disinformation, and build adequate centralised capacities to carry it out.”

Almost seven months later, this “action plan” is still a work in progress, the coordination centre is nowhere to be seen and the disinformation agenda is scattered among a few ministries, with no clear unified strategy in place.

“The first key thing that happened is that this theme has finally been addressed politically, and it is being given the proper attention,” Daniel Milo, an analyst at the Globsec Policy Institute, told BIRN.

“In previous years, there were some lonely fighters at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or in the police, but there was no systematic support,” he said, adding that while it was good the new cabinet set as an official goal in its program the targeting of disinformation, it has yet to result in any concrete action.

One of the more visible efforts came this summer, when the Health Ministry hired Jakub Goda, a leading journalist focusing on disinformation, to help with its strategic communications. Reacting to the growing “infodemic” surrounding the coronavirus, the ministry is starting to focus on debunking hoaxes and sharing verified information from medical experts via social networks. “In the middle of the pandemic, the urgency of this problem became even clearer,” said Goda in an interview with BIRN earlier this month.

The Health Ministry prepared a short guide on how to see through disinformation about COVID-19, joined an information campaign by public broadcaster RTVS in which a leading expert on infectious diseases talked about the safety of wearing face masks, and recorded a video with COVID-19 patients sharing their personal experiences with the virus.

While the video registered an admirable 600,000 views with over 3,300 shares by October 19, the most viral posts from extremist politicians questioning the coronavirus crisis have been watched several times more, thanks to a developed network of dozens of Slovak Facebook pages that spread disinformation on a regular basis. The fight against disinformation by the Health Ministry is far from over, said Goda, adding that the ministry has already expanded capacities and more people should be hired soon.

Although Goda’s work at the ministry is essential, it is only a first step, experts think. “It is a good step, but to think that a single person will save the strategic communications of a whole ministry in such a big topic is naive,” said Milo.

“Jakub has dealt with these topics for years and I value him as a colleague, but this alone doesn’t stand a chance in stopping the enormous avalanche of lies about COVID-19 that are shared online and on social networks every day,” he explained. “However, he can do his part and maybe he can convince the management at the ministry that the communication and information part is just as important today as the medical measures.”

Another visible and popular vehicle for combatting disinformation is the Slovak police force’s Facebook page dedicated specifically to uncovering hoaxes. During the pandemic, police experts have debunked dozens of lies and manipulative posts about the virus, sharing the verified information with its 85,000 followers. Its most popular videos debunking lies about COVID-19 testing sites or the government preparing a tough lockdown were viewed by between 100,00 and 200,000 people each.

The number of COVID-19 cases in Slovakia is growing exponentially, data shows. Photo: Office of the Government of SR

Saving democracy

Over the past few years, the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs has taken the lead in combatting disinformation in Slovakia, focusing on developing strategic communications with the public. This year it opened a new department to counter hybrid threats and “enforce resilience” in the system.

“We have basically provoked more government activity in this area,” said Imrich Babic, head of the strategic communications department at the Slovak Foreign Ministry. “Now, there is big hope that it becomes more systematic. It is in the legislative plans of different ministries already, so it’s on a good path.”

The Foreign Ministry, it seems, might be the one part of government where most people, including political leaders, understand the importance of having clear and unambiguous messages in communication. Foreign Minister Ivan Korcok, the former Slovak ambassador to Washington and Brussels, said in his first press conference in March that there is no doubt about Slovakia’s place in Europe and in the world: its allies are in the West, and its aim is to protect European values and unity.

“It’s a question of strategic importance, of protecting a healthy democracy,” said Marcel Pesko, the special ambassador who is heading up the hybrid threats department at the Foreign Ministry.

“Slovakia is very vulnerable in this sense,” he added, explaining that he thinks it’s due to the combination of history, political communication and the fragile democratic heritage. “Based on all of this, Slovaks are more prone to trusting disinformation.”

Experts at the ministry agree that Slovakia needs to significantly step up its fight against hybrid threats. And that means adopting the “whole of society” approach: reforming the education curriculum, pushing for more control of social networks and forming a centralised coordination mechanism within government. “The process has already started; we just need to frame it now. We would like to create the coordination mechanism by the end of the year,” Pesko told BIRN.

The proposed mechanism should create a system for dealing with hybrid threats, which includes all the ministries as well as other government offices. Its precise form, however, has yet to be decided.

In the meantime, the Foreign Ministry is organising educational programs at universities and schools; setting up workshops for Slovak diplomats and ministry employees; coordinating their policies and communication in strategic areas; and fighting disinformation online, in the media and through direct communication from political leaders.

Slovak Foreign Minister Ivan Korcok speaks at a press conference after a government meeting. Photo: Office of the Government of SR

Addressing security threats

Even before COVID-19 spread across Europe, Slovakia had been the target of propaganda campaigns by Russia and China, including various forms of hybrid warfare, according to the Slovak intelligence services.

In August, Slovakia became the 28th EU state to join the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats in Helsinki and the Slovak Defence Ministry has become one of the leaders of the fight against disinformation within the new government.

“The Defence Ministry wants to be active in this area,” Martina Koval Kakascikova, spokeswoman for the ministry, told BIRN. “One of the reasons is that hybrid threats will become a significant part of military operations in the future.”

In October, the ministry hired a special advisor for dealing with hybrid threats, and the communications department has taken on an even bigger role debunking disinformation and hoaxes, too.

“Moreover, the pandemic has reinforced the disinformation narratives, so the Defence Ministry has intensified its strategic communications, whether on social networks or in the field,” said Koval Kakascikova. “We also think exchanging information and experiences in the area of combatting hybrid threats and disinformation with our partners is essential.”

Although public communication from leading politicians in the previous government could be described as chaotic or conflicting at best, there is some evidence that the activities of the individual experts at the foreign and defence ministries has bolstered public support for Slovakia’s membership of NATO and the EU over the past three years. While in 2017 only 43% of Slovaks supported NATO membership, by 2019 that support had grown to 56%, according to a Globsec Trends survey. Eurobarometer, which monitors the evolution of public opinion in all EU member states, confirmed that a steady majority of Slovaks still supports the EU. Trust in liberal democracy and Slovakia’s Western allies, particularly the US, remains a challenge, however.

An additional challenge will come later this month after the Slovak government announced its intention to carry out a mass testing program across the entire country, with the aim of becoming the first country in Europe to pull off such a feat.

Disinformation experts have already warned that anti-COVID and anti-health system campaigns will definitely take off, putting an extra strain on the government’s efforts in trying to persuade people about the benefits of general testing. “In the next two weeks, so-called agitprop will take over – a fast drumming, the more absurd the better,” predicted Infosecurity.sk. “There’s nothing to lose. People are ready to listen.”

To counter this threat effectively, Marcel Pesko, the person heading up the hybrid threats department at the Foreign Ministry, admitted that, “there is still a lot of work to do in this area.”

Although all government experts agree that activists and NGOs have, until now, done a good job in fighting disinformation, they say it’s time the state picks up the baton. “The role of the state can’t be replaced by NGOs or the media,” said Pesko. “It is important to have political will to deal with these topics. And I can see that now.”

Slovak Businessman and Associate Found Not Guilty of Ordering Murder of Journalist

A Slovak court on Thursday found businessman Marian Kocner and his associate Alena Zsuzsova not guilty of ordering the murder of journalist Jan Kuciak from 2018, in a landmark case that reshaped the country’s political landscape and which is still having repercussions today.

In what many in the local media consider a surprising verdict given the weight of evidence presented in the court, the three-member senate said there was insufficient evidence to convict Kocner and Zsuzsova, who were suspected of ordering the murder of the investigative journalist and his fiancee, Martina Kusnirova.

A third defendant on trial with Kocner and Zsuzsova, former soldier Tomas Szabo, was found guilty and sentenced to 25 years in a maximum security prison. Szabo was a cousin of Miroslav Marcek, who admitted to shooting Kuciak and Kusnirova at the beginning of the trial. Another man was sentenced to 15 years last year for involvement in the murder-for-hire.

The prosecution is expected to appeal the decision of the special court at the Supreme Court. Right after the verdict, Dennik N daily reported that the senate was divided in their opinions, with two of the judges outvoting the chair Ruzena Sabova. Disputes among the senate were suspected back in August, when the original date of verdict hearing was moved to September 3.

Slovak media have described the verdict as “shocking” given the mountain of evidence against Kocner and Zsuzsova that was presented during the trial. The families of the victims listened to the verdict in tears, leaving the courtroom immediately after hearing the acquittal of Kocner.

The killings of Kuciak and his architect fiancée Martina Kusnirova confirmed many people’s worst fears about the existence in Slovakia of a nexus of organised crime, oligarch power and political mafia which had corrupted much of the country. Mass protests across the country in 2018 led to the resignation of the then-prime minister, Robert Fico.

Question Marks over Slovak Quarantine App Fuel Privacy Concern

A lack of detail on a new smartphone app designed to help authorities in Slovakia track people in home quarantine is raising doubts about its compliance with data privacy rules and fuelling conspiracy theories.

With 28 confirmed deaths to date, Slovakia tops the chart of European countries with the lowest number of COVID-19 victims per capita, a source of pride for politicians and healthcare workers.

But the country is also one of the last in Central and Eastern Europe to introduce any kind of digital technology to help tackle the pandemic.

Last week, parliament passed a bill introducing an app to keep tabs on those in quarantine at home, after the country’s Constitutional Court halted development of a contact-tracing app that had triggered concern over the need for the mass collection of data.

The quarantine app was due to go live on May 18, but authorities postponed the launch saying more testing was needed.

Created by the Slovak IT firm Sygic, the app avoids the need for any mass collection of data, but a lack of detailed information, particularly regarding how the data will be stored and who will have access to it, has many Slovaks worried.

Data rights activists say that, while the government must do what it can to save lives, it must also be transparent in order to earn the trust of the people.

“We understand that this difficult time calls for quick and maybe non-traditional solutions, but we can’t forget the [need for] clear communication, which would dispel concerns about a possible abuse of private data,” said Andrea Cox, director of Digital Intelligence, which works to promote the protection of digital rights in Slovakia.

Last week, Slovak parliament passed a bill introducing an app to keep tabs on those in quarantine at home, after the country’s Constitutional Court halted development of a contact-tracing app that had triggered concern over the need for the mass collection of data. Photo: EPA-EFE/JUSTIN LANE

Constitution vs. public health

For the past two months, Slovaks returning to the country have had to go into state-run quarantine facilities where they are tested for the novel coronavirus and, if negative, allowed home.

But Slovakia’s government, led by Igor Matovic and his anti-establishment OLANO party, has faced widespread criticism over conditions at the facilities.

The government now says the new, voluntary app – based on face biometrics and movement data – will allow people to self-isolate at home if they would rather not enter a state-run facility.

The data will be monitored by the Slovak Public Health authority, which, under the new law, must destroy a person’s data as soon as the required quarantine period is over.

It is still not known, however, where the data that is collected will be stored and who will have access to it.

Introduction of the app follows a Constitutional Court ruling last week that suspended telecommunications legislation adopted in April and that cleared the way for the mass collection of data from smartphones, effectively slamming the brakes on development of a contact-tracing app. Judges ruled that the Telecommunications Act was not specific enough and left unclear how private data would be handled.

It lacked, they said, “necessary guarantees against the misuse of the processed private information” and means of independent oversight.

Matovic said he was confident the new home-quarantine technology would pass muster.

“I think the constitutional court decision cannot prevent us from making the quarantine stay more comfortable for people,” he told a press conference on May 14.

But data privacy advocates are unconvinced.

“It is unacceptable for apps that could affect the everyday life of Slovak citizens to not be communicated properly,” said Eliska Pirkova, Europe Policy Analyst at Access Now, an international data rights advocacy group, during an online discussion on May 15 about the erosion of data rights during the COVID-19 crisis in Slovakia.

“We all know that technologies have the power to discriminate and breach not just the right to privacy, but other rights too. This is what I see as a problem in Slovakia.”

Technology and public trust

Poor communication has created a vacuum in Slovakia filled by misinformation and conspiracy theories about a potential COVID-19 vaccine, the origin of the coronavirus and the threats to privacy proposed by new technology.

Marian Kotleba, leader of the neo-fascist People’s Party Our Slovakia, LSNS, that won eight per cent of votes in Slovakia’s February general election, has shared conspiracies about microchips being implanted into people against their will, while former Prime Minister Robert Fico, leader of SMER-SD, has accused Matovic’s government of planning to spy on people via their phone data.

According to survey conducted by the Slovak Academy of Sciences, a large majority of voters for both parties believe the coronavirus was created in a lab and deliberately disseminated, while just 40 per cent of Slovaks say they would get vaccinated against COVID-19 once a vaccine becomes available.

“Insufficient communication creates space for those who shout the loudest, although they often talk rubbish, from the absurdities about microchips and manipulations to the 5G networks,” Cox told the May 15 online discussion, referring to a conspiracy theory that 5G mobile technology helps spread the virus.

“We want to believe,” she said, “that in designing the latest technological solutions, the officials have kept in mind questions like digital exclusion or discrimination caused by the lack of internet access, or social oversight.”

Need for vigilance

As countries emerge from lockdown, the development of smartphone apps to combat the spread of COVID-19 is being watched with mounting concern by human rights organisations concerned at their potential for abuse.

“Some restrictions on people’s rights may be justifiable during a public health emergency, but people are being asked to sacrifice their privacy and turn over personal data for use by untested technologies,” Deborah Brown, senior digital rights researcher at Human Rights Watch, said last week.

“Containing the pandemic and reopening society are essential goals, but we can do this without pervasive surveillance.”

Erik Lastic, head of the political science department at the Comenius University in Bratislava, said the pandemic had only further underlined the failure of the Slovak state to keep pace with technology. For years, corruption and incompetence have stymied efforts to create an effective digital public administration system. 

“The last decade, at the least, has shown that the state is failing in the development of any information systems,” said Lastic, also taking part in the online discussion. “It would be very unrealistic to expect that the pandemic can suddenly change that.”

Lastic said it was “good” that legislation introduced to combat COVID-19 was limited to the end of 2020, but that the experience of some countries, particularly in sidestepping legal restraints in the fight against terrorism since the 9/11 attacks on the United States, showed the need for vigilance.

“It would be naïve to trust that the state would limit itself and that it wouldn’t use tools that had worked well for it once,” he said.

BIRD Community

Are you a professional journalist or a media worker looking for an easily searchable and comprehensive database and interested in safely (re)connecting with more than thousands of colleagues from Southeastern and Central Europe?

We created BIRD Community, a place where you can have it all!

Join Now