跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(34.204.198.73) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/19 14:10
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳寧
研究生(外文):Ning Chen
論文名稱:線上平台與內容之治理—以歐盟《數位服務法》與英國《線上安全法》草案為例
論文名稱(外文):Governance of Online Platforms Regarding Content: Case of the Digital Services Act in the EU and the Draft Online Safety Bill in the UK
指導教授:洪貞玲洪貞玲引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chen-Ling Hung
口試委員:林麗雲盧建誌
口試委員(外文):Lih-Yun LinChien-Chih Lu
口試日期:2023-10-03
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:新聞研究所
學門:傳播學門
學類:新聞學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2023
畢業學年度:112
語文別:中文
論文頁數:125
中文關鍵詞:內容審查數位服務法歐盟平台問責線上安全法草案線上內容英國
外文關鍵詞:content moderationUnited Kingdomplatform governanceonline contentEuropean UnionDigital Services Actdraft Online Safety Bill
DOI:10.6342/NTU202304364
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:46
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
線上平台的出現使意見交流與資訊分享變得更為便利,但同時一些涉及違法的內容也透過平台迅速傳播,對用戶和社會造成了負面影響。各國政府相繼研擬相關法規以有效回應此問題,而掌控演算法與推薦系統的線上平台成為首要課責對象,其中針對不妥內容之審查更關係到人民的言論自由,因此如何在賦予平台法律責任以妥善遏止不妥內容在線上流竄的同時,防止平台濫權並保障人民基本人權,成為立法者應思考的議題。本研究以歐盟《數位服務法》與英國的《線上安全法》草案為研究對象,分析兩國如何訂定平台內容審查的相關程序規範,包括規管之內容類型界定、課予平台的義務與相關審查措施之要求等,並探討兩國法規中政府、平台與社會三方所扮演之角色與對應關係。
英國的《線上安全法》草案關注違法內容和對兒童有害的內容,該草案依服務對象或用戶規模將平台劃分為不同類別,並據以要求平台承擔相應的審查責任,包括進行違法內容風險評估與降低風險評估中偵測的風險。歐盟的《數位服務法》則將管制重點放在違法內容,並依用戶規模賦予平台不同審查義務,尤其超大型平台因影響力大需承擔更多責任。相較於《數位服務法》僅要求平台在收到通知後介入處理內容,並免除其主動監測線上內容之責任,《線上安全法》草案要求平台審查內容的主動程度較高,其規定平台平時應積極降低違法內容之危害風險與縮短其出現時間,更訂有用以協助平台及時發現不妥內容的「主動偵測技術」相關規範。
本研究觀察《線上安全法》草案和《數位服務法》中政府、平台和社會三方的關係。政府主要負責監管平台,確保其遵守法規並履行審查義務,英國的法規也讓政府扮演輔導者的角色協助平台盡到其職責要求。平台為服務提供者,且負有建立機制以維護用戶安全的責任,同時平台需定期提供透明度報告說明法規執行情形。民間社會是服務接受者也同時扮演協助政府監督平台運作的角色,民眾若發現平台中出現不當內容可向平台反映,部分專業人士與機構更可協助識別違法內容、分析平台營運或協助調解糾紛。總體而言,兩部法規皆透過透明度之提升以及多方利害關係人的共同參與實踐數位治理的目標。
The emergence of online platforms has made it more convenient for opinion exchange and information sharing. However, illegal content rapidly spreads through these platforms, causing negative impacts on users and the society. Governments have taken various legislative approaches to effectively address this issue. As online platforms rely on algorithmic systems to control the content users’ access, platforms are one of the primary targets of accountability. Regulating online speech is challenging as it may cause a threat to the freedom of speech, and thus, it is important for lawmakers to come up with a framework that deals with the legal responsibility of platforms to effectively curb the spread of inappropriate online content, while preventing platform abuse and safeguarding people's basic rights. This study focuses on the European Union’s Digital Services Act and the United Kingdom’s draft Online Safety Bill, and analyzes how they deal with content moderation on platforms, including defining the types of regulated content, imposing obligations on platforms, and specifying the required scrutiny measures. The study also explores the roles and relationships amongst the government, platforms, and society as depicted in these regulations.
The draft Online Safety Bill focuses on illegal content and content that is harmful to children. It categorizes platforms into different types based on their audience or user base and requires platforms to comply with specific duties, such as carrying out illegal content risk assessments and taking proportionate measures to mitigate the risks identified in the risk assessment. The Digital Services Act mainly deals with illegal content and assigns different obligations to platforms based on their user base. It places much greater responsibility on very large online platforms due to their greater influence. Compared to the Digital Services Act, which only requires platforms to take action upon receiving a notice and exempts them from the obligation of monitoring online content, the draft Online Safety Bill requires platforms to monitor content more actively. It stipulates that platforms should manage the risk of harm to individuals caused by illegal content and minimize the length of time for which the content is present. It also includes regulations on “proactive technology” which assists platforms in analyzing and detecting inappropriate content.
This study also observes the relationships amongst the government, platforms, and society in the draft Online Safety Bill and the Digital Services Act. The government's main role is to regulate platforms, ensuring their compliance with regulations. The draft Online Safety Bill also positions the government as a guide to assist platforms in complying with their obligations. Platforms are service providers and shoulder the responsibility to design proportionate systems that ensure the safety of users. They are also required to provide transparency reports explaining any content moderation that they engaged. Civil society serves not only as the user of platform services but also as a role to assist the government in supervising platform operations. If individuals find inappropriate content on platforms, they can report it to the platform. Some professionals and organizations can assist in identifying illegal content, analyze platform operations, or help mediate disputes. Overall, both regulations aim to achieve digital governance through enhanced transparency and the involvement of multiple stakeholders.
口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 ix
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 言論自由之保障與限制 8
一、言論自由 8
二、各國的言論自由保障 9
三、言論自由與媒體 13
第二節 媒體監理與數位治理 15
一、管理、治理、監理定義比較 15
二、媒體監管與治理 16
三、數位治理 17
第三節 線上內容管制 18
一、恐怖主義內容 19
二、仇恨言論 20
三、惡意誹謗內容 20
四、煽動犯罪與暴力內容 21
五、兒童性剝削與虐待內容 21
六、報復性色情內容 22
七、違法交易內容 22
八、網路霸凌與騷擾 22
九、自殺、自殘與飲食失調 23
十、裸露或與情色內容 23
十一、假訊息 23
第四節 線上平台與平台治理 26
一、線上平台之運作 26
二、線上平台之定性 28
三、平台治理的方向 29
四、平台問責 31
第三章 研究問題與方法 34
第一節 研究問題 34
第二節 研究方法 35
第三節 研究對象簡述 36
一、歐盟 《數位服務法》(Digital Services Act) 36
二、英國 《線上安全法》草案(Draft Online Safety Bill) 41
第四章 研究結果 46
第一節 法規適用範圍 46
一、規管對象 46
二、規管內容形式 48
三、規管內容種類 49
第二節 內容審查機制與救濟措施 53
一、 內容審查機制 53
二、救濟措施 62
第三節 角色與對應關係 64
一、內容審查流程圖整理 64
二、政府與平台 70
三、平台與社會 84
四、社會與政府 89
第五章 結論 93
第一節 研究結果 93
一、言論自由之保障 93
二、平台透明度之提升 94
三、多方參與模式之建立 95
第二節 討論與反思 97
第三節 研究限制與建議 100
參考文獻 101
王宏恩(2022年12月9日)。《香港網軍如何在2020年後透過臉書大規模持續幫助國民黨》。【Medium】。上網日期:2023年1月9日,取自https://austinwang-23988.medium.com/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E7%B6%B2%E8%BB%8D%E5%A6%82%E4%BD%95%E5%9C%A82020%E5%B9%B4%E5%BE%8C%E9%80%8F%E9%81%8E%E8%87%89%E6%9B%B8%E5%A4%A7%E8%A6%8F%E6%A8%A1%E6%8C%81%E7%BA%8C%E5%B9%AB%E5%8A%A9%E5%9C%8B%E6%B0%91%E9%BB%A8-7523b42790dc
王亞維、陳百齡(2011)。《電視媒體製播新聞問責機制研究》(國家通訊傳播委員會100年度委託研究報告,PG10006-0046)。臺北市:國家通訊傳播委員會。取自https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/retrieve/81518/RRPG100060046.pdf
孔德廉等人(2019年12月25日)。〈打不死的內容農場──揭開「密訊」背後操盤手和中國因素〉,《報導者》。上網日期:2023年1月14日,取自https://www.twreporter.org/a/information-warfare-business-content-farm-mission
台灣民主實驗室(2021)。《震耳欲聾的低語:2020 大選中國在台資訊操作》。【Medium】。上網日期:2023年1月9日,取自https://medium.com/doublethinklab-tw/deafening-whispers-ffd57fb3acbf
自由時報(2019年10月15日)。〈開鍘!臉書打擊假消息 傳中資「內容農場」遭禁止分享〉,《自由時報》。上網日期:2023年1月14日,取自https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/breakingnews/2947171
何吉森(2018)。〈假新聞之監理與治理探討〉,《傳播研究與實踐》,8(2):1-41。
李韋廷(2008)。《審議式民主與大眾傳播媒體新角色初探》。國立政治大學中山人文社會科學研究所碩士論文。
吳琍君(2022年9月7日)。〈數位中介法風暴(3)業者執行不易 言論自由受限成隱憂〉,《中央廣播電台》。上網日期:2023年1月30日,取自https://www.rti.org.tw/news/view/id/2143795
林子儀(1988)。〈言論自由之理論基礎〉,《臺大法學叢論》,18(1):227-275。
林良昇(2022年8月17日)。〈數位中介服務法 學者期待少點內容管制多點經濟管制〉,《自由時報》。上網日期:2023年3月5日,取自https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/breakingnews/4028077
陳志賢(2018)。〈數位媒體與社群平台使用者之勞動分析〉,《資訊社會研究》,35:13-49。DOI: 10.29843/JCCIS.201807_(35).0002
陳憶寧(2021)。〈社群平台的治理:從Facebook成立監察委員會兼談如何處理虛假資訊〉,《中華傳播學刊》,39:129-143。DOI: 10.3966/172635812021060039005
許士軍(2013年5月28日)。〈「公司治理」不是什麼萬應藥方!〉,《遠見雜誌》。上網日期:2023年1月20日,取自 https://www.gvm.com.tw/article.html?id=24393
國家通訊傳播委員會(2022年8月11日)。《「數位中介服務法」草案公開說明會(第1場-通傳業者與公協會場)》。【Youtube 影片】。上網日期:2023年1月19日,取自 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k87qQQucMU&ab_channel=%E9%80%9A%E5%82%B3%E6%9C%83NCC
葉至誠、葉立程(2011)。〈文獻資料分析法〉,《研究方法與論文寫作》,頁138-154。臺北市:商鼎文化。
楊劭楷(2019年4月29日)。〈失靈的意見市場:假消息、言論自由與真理理論〉,《鳴人堂》。上網日期:2023年1月9日,取自https://opinion.udn.com/opinion/story/6685/3783597
楊劭楷(2021)。《社群媒體假訊息管制之言論自由分析》。國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學系碩士論文。
楊智傑(2021)。〈美國不實言論之言論自由保障〉,《中正大學法學集刊》,71:121-192。
楊智傑(2022年8月25日)。〈為何中介法借鏡歐盟遭炎上〉,《今日新聞》。上網日期:2023年1月30日,取自https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%B7%B7%E4%BB%94%E5%85%A7-%E7%82%BA%E4%BD%95%E4%B8%AD%E4%BB%8B%E6%B3%95%E5%80%9F%E9%8F%A1%E6%AD%90%E7%9B%9F%E9%81%AD%E7%82%8E%E4%B8%8A-093337478.html
賴祥蔚(2011)。〈言論自由與真理追求 ──觀念市場隱喻的溯源與檢視〉,《新聞學研究》,108:103-139。
蘇思云(2022年8月16日)。〈NCC中介法加註警語條款歧見大 專家質疑形同貼黃標〉,《中央社》。上網日期:2023年1月30日,取自https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/202208160117.aspx
蘇慧婕(2020)。〈正當平台程序作為網路中介者的免責要件:德國網路執行法的合憲性評析〉,《臺大法學論叢》,49(4):1915-1977。
蘇慧婕(2022年12月9日)。〈數位傳播新趨勢:新聞實踐、資訊操控危機與平台管理政策〉, 「臺灣大學新聞研究所研討會」,臺北市:國立臺灣大學。
INSIDE(2022年8月19日)。〈取TiEA、DMA、DEAT 發表聯合聲明,敬請 NCC 暫緩《數位中介服務法》〉,《INSIDE硬塞的網路趨勢觀察》。上網日期:2023年1月9日,取自https://www.inside.com.tw/article/28659-moda-tiea-dma-deat
Line(2022年12月21日)。〈LINE訊息查證2022年度假訊息排行榜大公開! 疫情仍為焦點!錯誤偏方「綠茶加檸檬」治新冠排名第一 假疫情補助則為第三 民生食物議題受關注!紅殼雞蛋加色素偽裝土雞蛋的謠言排第二〉,《Line》。上網日期:2023年1月9日,取自https://linecorp.com/zh-hant/pr/news/zh-hant/2022/4450
Alexander, L., & Horton, P. (2018). Review essay: The impossibility of a free speech principle. In Alexander, L. (Eds.), Freedom of Speech (pp. 303-341). London, UK: Routledge.
Ali, A. (2021, April 28). How Media Consumption Has Changed Over the Last Decade (2011-2021). Visual Capitalist. Retrieved January 7, 2023, from https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-media-consumption-has-changed-in-2021/
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31, 211-236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211
Bell, J. (2014). Harmful or helpful? The role of the internet in self-harming and suicidal behaviour in young people. Mental Health Review Journal, 19(1), 61-71. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHRJ-05-2013-0019
Black, J. (2008). Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation & Governance, 2(2), 137–164. DOI:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00034.x
Blasi, V. (2004). Holmes and the Marketplace of Ideas. The Supreme Court Review, 2004, 1-46.
Boot, M. (2022, February 10). Why the U.S. Ramped Up Its Information War With Russia. Retrieved January 7, 2023, from https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/why-us-ramped-its-information-war-russia
Bradly, C., & Wingfield, R. (2018). A Rights-Respecting Model of Online Content Regulation by Platforms. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from: https://www.gp-digital.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/A-rights-respecting-model-of-online-content-regulation-by-platforms.pdf
Brady, K. (2017, June 4). Hefty fines against hate speech in Germany. DW. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://www.dw.com/en/german-justice-minister-calls-for-hefty-fines-to-combat-online-hate-speech/a-38300446
Brooks, E. (2022, April 1). Why Is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy: 5 Reasons. Retrieved January 14, 2023, from https://www.liberties.eu/en/stories/why-is-freedom-of-speech-important/44136
Cadwalladr, C., & Graham-Harrison, E. (2018, March 17). How Cambridge Analytica turned Facebook ‘likes’ into a lucrative political tool. The Guardian. Retrieved December 28, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/17/facebook-cambridge-analytica-kogan-data-algorithm
Carey, J. W. (2003). New media and TV viewing behavior. NHK Broadcasting Studies, 2, 45-63.
Cassese, S., Comba, M., Bogdanowicz, P., Cameron, I., della Cananea, G., Cartabia, M.,... Williams, V. (2022). Freedom of Expression as a Common Constitutional Tradition in Europe. Vienna, Austria: European Law Institute. Retrieved from https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/p_eli/Publications/ELI_Report_on_Freedom_of_Expression.pdf
Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Cauffman, C., & Goanta, C. (2021). A New Order: The Digital Services Act and Consumer Protection. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 12(4), 758-774. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2021.8
Centre for Democracy and Technology. (2012). Shielding theMessengers:Protecting Platforms for Expression and Innovation. Retrieved January 20, 2023, from https://cdt.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/CDT-Intermediary-Liability-2012.pdf
Chini, M. (2022, April 23). 'What is illegal offline is illegal online': EU tightens rules for internet giants. The Brussels Times. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://www.brusselstimes.com/219152/what-is-illegal-offline-is-illegal-online-eu-tightens-rules-for-internet-giants
Chitkara, H. (2022, September 14). To fix social media, senators turn to a research transparency bill. Protocol. Retrieved January 18, 2023, from https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/platform-accountability-act-senate
Claussen, V. (2018, October 28). Fighting hate speech and fake news. The Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) in Germany in the context of European legislation. Retrieved March 12, 2023, from https://www.medialaws.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/6.-Claussen.pdf
Clegg, N. (2022, August 16). How Meta Is Planning for the 2022 US Midterms. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://about.fb.com/news/2022/08/meta-plans-for-2022-us-midterms/
Coe, P. (2022). The Draft Online Safety Bill and the regulation of hate speech: have we opened Pandora’s box? Journal of Media Law, 14(1), 50-75. DOI: 10.1080/17577632.2022.2083870
Council of Europe. (2012). Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection of human rights with regard to social networking services. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1929453
Council of Europe. (n.d.). The EU's work to combat human trafficking. Retrieved January 3, 2023, from https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/eu-against-human-trafficking/
Cross, M. (2014). Social Media Security. Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2011-0-09032-4
Dang, S., & Dave, P. (2022, November 10). U.S. election misinformation limited, not stopped, on social media -experts. Reuters. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-social-platforms-could-see-spike-election-misinformation-2022-11-09/
Davola, A. (2022, October19). The Digital Services Act, Published: A Good Start And – Yet – Just A Start. Retrieved December 31, 2022, from http://competitionlawblog.kluwercompetitionlaw.com/2022/10/19/the-digital-services-act-published-a-good-start-and-yet-just-a-start/
De Blasio, E., & Selva, D. (2021). Who Is Responsible for Disinformation? European Approaches to Social Platforms’ Accountability in the Post-Truth Era. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(6), 825–846. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764221989784
Delli Carpini, M. X. (2004). Mediating Democratic Engagement: The Impact of Communications on Citizens’ Involvement in Political and Civic Life. In L. L. Kaid (Eds.), Handbook of Political Communication Research (pp. 395-434). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. (2022, November 28). New protections for children and free speech added to internet laws. London, UK: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. Retrieved January 12, 2023, from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-protections-for-children-and-free-speech-added-to-internet-laws
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. (2022, December 16). A guide to the Online Safety Bill. London, UK: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.gov.uk/guidance/a-guide-to-the-online-safety-bill#the-next-steps-for-the-bill
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. (n.d.). Overview of expected impact of changes to the Online Safety Bill. London, UK: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport. Retrieved March 8, 2023, from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-bill-supporting-documents/overview-of-expected-impact-of-changes-to-the-online-safety-bill
Department of Justice. (2020, June). Department of Justice’s Review of Section 230 of The Communications Decency Act of 1996. Washington, DC: Department of Justice. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.justice.gov/file/1286331/download
Dewey, C. (2016, October 12). Facebook has repeatedly trended fake news since firing its human editors. The Washington Post. Retrieved January 6, 2023, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/10/12/facebook-has-repeatedly-trended-fake-news-since-firing-its-human-editors/
Diakopoulos, N. (2015). Algorithmic accountability: Journalistic investigation of computational power structures. Digital Journalism, 3(3), 398-415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.976411
Dredge, S. (2014, March 10). Strictly algorithm: How news finds people in the Facebook and Twitter age. The Guardian. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/10/journalism-democracy-algorithmsfacebook-google-twitter
Dumas, R. (2022, May 3). Freedom of Expression and Democracy. Retrieved January 12, 2023, from https://www.freiheit.org/latin-america/freedom-expression-and-democracy
Durham University. (n.d.). What is online harassment? Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://reportandsupport.durham.ac.uk/support/what-is-online-harassment
DW. (2015, September 14). Fighting hate speech on Facebook. DW. Retrieved January 6, 2023, from https://www.dw.com/en/german-justice-minister-to-set-up-task-force-on-internet-hate-speech/a-18714334
Dwoskin, E. (2021, September 4). Misinformation on Facebook got six times more clicks than factual news during the 2020 election, study says. The Washington Post. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/03/facebook-misinformation-nyu-study/
Eberwein, T., Karmasin, M., Krotz, F., & Rath, M. (2019). Responsibility and Resistance: Ethics in Mediatized Worlds. Manhattan, NY: Springer.
Echikson, W., & Knodt, O. (2018, November 9). Germany’s NetzDG: A key test for combatting online hate. CEPS Policy Insight, No. 2018/09. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3300636
Edwards, L. (2009). Pornography, censorship and the Internet. In Edwards, L. & Waedle, C. (Eds.), Law and the Internet (3rd ed., pp. 623–670). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1435093
Electronic Frontier Foundation. (n.d.). Section 230. Retrieved March 16, 2023, from https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
Emerson, T. (1970). The System of Freedom of Expression. New York, NY: Random House.
Etteldorf, C. (2021). October Entry into Force for NetzDG Appeal Procedure. Retrieved March 28, 2023, from https://merlin.obs.coe.int/article/9334
European Commission. (1996). Illegal and harmful content on the Internet: Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (COM 96(487) final). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:1996:0487:FIN:en:PDF
European Commission. (2001). European Governance A White Paper (doc/01/10). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/DOC_01_10
European Commission. (2018, March 1). Commission Recommendation on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (2018/334). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018H0334&from=EN
European Commission. (2018, April 26). Synopsis report of the public consultation on fake news and online disinformation. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/synopsis-report-public-consultation-fake-news-and-online-disinformation
European Commission. (2018, September 26). Code of Practice on Disinformation. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/code-practice-disinformation
European Commission. (2018, December 15). Summary Report on the open public consultation on the Digital Services Act Package. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/summary-report-open-public-consultation-digital-services-act-package
European Commission. (2020, January 30). Opening speech of Vice-President Věra Jourová at the conference “Disinfo Horizon: Responding to Future Threats.” Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_20_160
European Commission. (2020, September 10). First baseline reports – Fighting COVID-19 disinformation Monitoring Programme. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/first-baseline-reports-fighting-covid-19-disinformation-monitoring-programme
European Commission. (2020, December 15). Commission Staff Working Document Executive Summary of the Impact Assessment Report . Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/impact-assessment-digital-services-act
European Commission. (2022, March 25).Digital Markets Act: Commission welcomes political agreement on rules to ensure fair and open digital markets. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission website. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1978
European Commission. (2022, April 23). Digital Services Act: Commission welcomes political agreement on rules ensuring a safe and accountable online environment. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_2545
European Commission. (2022, November 14). Questions and Answers: Digital Services Act. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/QANDA_20_2348
European Commission. (2023, April 25). Questions and Answers: Digital Services Act. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved May 31, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/QANDA_20_2348
European Commission. (n.d.a). The Digital Services Act package. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act-package
European Commission. (n.d.b). The Digital Services Act: ensuring a safe and accountable online environment. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 1, 2023, from https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en#documents
European Commission. (n.d.c). Europe’s Digital Decade: digital targets for 2030. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved January 2, 2023, from https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/europes-digital-decade-digital-targets-2030_en#digital-citizenship-rights-and-principles-for-europeans
European Digital Media Association. (2020). Fundamentals of the Online Responsibility Framework Series: A Legal Basis to Act. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/ORF-Series_-Basis-to-Act_EDiMA.pdf
European Digital Rights (2020). DSA: Platform Regulation Done Right. Retrieved December 30, 2022, from https://test.edri.org/our-work/dsa-platform-regulation-done-right/
European Parliament. (2022). Digital Agenda for Europe. Brussels, Belgium: Ratcliff, C., Martinello, B. & Litos, V.. Retrieved January 2, 2023, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/64/digital-agenda-for-europe
European People’s Party. (2021). Make online violence against women a crime throughout Europe. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://www.eppgroup.eu/newsroom/news/make-online-violence-against-women-a-crime-throughout-eu
Flew, T. (2018). Platforms on trial. InterMedia, 46(2), 18–23.
Flew, T., Martin, F., & Suzor, N. (2019). Internet regulation as media policy: Rethinking the question of digital communication platform governance. Journal of Digital Media & Policy, 10(1), 33-50.
Fransen, L. (2012). Multi-stakeholder governance and voluntary programme interactions: Legitimation politics in the institutional design of Corporate Social Responsibility. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 163–192. DOI:10.1093/ser/mwr029
Freiberg, A. (2010). The Tools of Regulation (1 Ed.). Sydney, AU: Federation Press.
Frosio, G., & Geiger, C. (2020). Taking Fundamental Rights Seriously in the Digital Services Act’s Platform Liability Regime. European Law Journal, 2022 (forthcoming). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3747756
Geltzer, J., & Ghosh, D. (2018, May 14). Tech companies are ruining America’s image. Foreign Policy. Retrieved January 18, 2023, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/05/14/tech-companies-are-ruining-americas-image/
Gesley, J. (2019, April). Germany. In Rodriguez-Ferrand, G. (Ed.), Initiatives to Counter Fake News in Selected Countries (pp.33-40). Washington, DC: The Law Library of Congress. Retrieved from https://irp.fas.org/eprint/lloc-fake-news.pdf
Gesley, J. (2021). Germany: Network Enforcement Act Amended to Better Fight Online Hate Speech. Washington, DC: The Law Library of Congress. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2021-07-06/germany-network-enforcement-act-amended-to-better-fight-online-hate-speech/
Good Government Institute. (2022, July 25). The five pillars of digital governance. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://www.good-governance.org.uk/publications/insights/the-five-pillars-of-digital-governance
Gorwa, R. (2019). The platform governance triangle: conceptualising the informal regulation of online content. Internet Policy Review, 8(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1407
Greenky, L. (2023). What the First Amendment really says – 4 basic principles of free speech in the US. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://theconversation.com/what-the-first-amendment-really-says-4-basic-principles-of-free-speech-in-the-us-197604
Gu, L., Kropotov, V., & Yarochkin, F. (2017). The fake news machine: How propagandists abuse the internet and manipulate the public. Trend Micro, 5, 1-85.
Guterres, A. (2019). Opening remarks at press encounter at launch of United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech. United Nations. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2019-06-18/un-strategy-and-plan-of-action-hate-speech-press-remarks
Hern, A. (2022, December 5). Online safety bill returns to parliament after five-month delay. The Washington Post. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/05/online-safety-bill-returns-to-parliament-after-five-month-delay
Hodges, L.W. (1986). Defining Press Responsibility: A Functional Approach. In Elliot, D. (Eds.), Responsible Journalism (pp. 13-31). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Hong, M. (2022). Regulating hate speech and disinformation online while protecting freedom of speech as an equal and positive right–comparing Germany, Europe and the United States. Journal of Media Law, 14(1), 76-96.
Horten, M. (2022, October 26). Regulating big tech platforms: Content moderation requirements in the UK Online Safety Bill and the EU Digital Services Act. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://eu.boell.org/en/regulating-big-tech-platforms#__RefHeading___Toc669_2200473386
Humanists UK. (n.d.). Harassment and incitement. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://humanists.uk/campaigns/human-rights-and-equality/freedom-of-speech-and-expression/harassment-and-incitement/
Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jacobson, D. (2000). Mill on liberty, speech, and the free society. Philosophy & public affairs, 29(3), 276-309.
Johnson, E. (2019, April 11). Silicon Valley’s self-regulating days “probably should be” over, Nancy Pelosi says. Vox. Retrieved January 6, 2023, from https://www.vox.com/podcasts/2019/4/11/18306834/nancy-pelosi-speaker-house-tech-regulation-antitrust-230-immunity-kara-swisher-decode-podcast
Joint Committee on the Draft Online Safety Bill. (2021). Draft Online Safety Bill Report of Session 2021–22 (HL Paper 129-HC 609). London, UK: UK Parliament. Retrieved January 9, 2023, from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt5802/jtselect/jtonlinesafety/129/12902.htm
Kantar Media. (2018). Internet users’ experience of harm online: summary of survey research. London, UK: OFCOM. Retrieved from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/120852/Internet-harm-research-2018-report.pdf
Kemp, S. (2022, February 15). Digital 2022: Taiwan. Retrieved January 19, 2023, from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-taiwan
Kim, K., & Moon, S.I. (2021). When Algorithmic Transparency Failed: Controversies Over Algorithm-Driven Content Curation in the South Korean Digital Environment. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(6), 847–862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764221989783
Klapper, D. (2022, October 21). As 2022 midterms approach, disinformation on social media platforms continues. PBS. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/as-2022-midterms-approach-disinformation-on-social-media-platforms-continues
Kleinwachter, W. (2008). Internet: International regulation. In W. Donsbach (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication (pp. 2432–2438). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
Koene A., Perez E., Webb H., Patel M., Ceppi S., Jirotka M., & McAuley D. (2017). Editorial responsibilities arising from personalization algorithms. ORBIT Journal, 1(1), 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29297/orbit.v1i1.26
Kwon, K. H., Xu, W. W., & Wellman, B. (2021). The Dark Social Web: Responsibility, Manipulation, and Participation in Global Digital Spaces. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(5), 683–688. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764221989782
Lawson, A. (2021, March 25). Moderating online content in the United States. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.orfonline.org/research/moderating-online-content-in-the-united-states/
Lessig, L. (2006). Code 2.0: And Other Laws of Cyberspace (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Lewik. (n.d.). Public incitement to crime. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://www.lewik.org/term/15582/public-incitement-to-crime-section-111-german-criminal-code/
MacCarthy, M. (2022). U.K. government purges “legal but harmful” provisions from its revised Online Safety Bill. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2022/12/21/u-k-government-purges-legal-but-harmful-provisions-from-its-revised-online-safety-bill/
Mackinnon, R., & Bradley-Schmieg, P. (2022, December 16). UK Threatens Blowtorching Internet Platforms – Including Wikipedia. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://cepa.org/article/uk-threatens-internet-platforms/
Madiega, T. (2020). Reform of the EU liability regime for online intermediaries (PE 649.404). Brussels, Belgium: European Parliament. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/649404/EPRS_IDA(2020)649404_EN.pdf
Martinson, J. (2017, June 18). A question for a dystopian age: What counts as fake news? The Guardian. Retrieved December 29, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jun/18/a-question-for-a-dystopian-age-what-counts-as-fake-news
Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Research Institute. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2017-05/apo-nid135936.pdf
Mazzucato, M. (2018). The value of everything: Making and taking in the global economy. London, UK: Hachette UK.
Mchangama, J. (2022, April 25). The Real Threat to Social Media Is Europe. Foreign Policy. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/25/the-real-threat-to-social-media-is-europe/
McQuail, D. (1987). Mass communication theory: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McQuail, D. (2005). McQuail’s mass communication theory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
McQuail, D. (2007a). Media, Regulation of. In Ritzer, G. (Ed.). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosm069
McQuail, D. (2007b). Introduction: The current state of media governance in Europe. In G. Terzis (Ed.), European media governance: National and regional dimensions (pp. 17–25). Bristol, UK: Intellect.
McQuail, D. & Deuze, M. (2020). McQuail’s Media and Mass Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mie Kim, Y. (2018, November 20). Voter Suppression Has Gone Digital. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voter-suppression-has-gone-digital
Mill, J. (1869). On Liberty (4th ed.). London, UK: Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=RbkAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Milton, J. (1961). Areopagitica (4th ed.). London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Mosley, T., & Hagan, A. (2021, January 7). How Social Media Fueled The Insurrection At The U.S. Capitol. WBUR. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2021/01/07/social-media-capitol-mob
Mueller, R. S., III. (2019). Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election. Washington, DC: Department of Justice. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download
Mullen Law Firm. (n.d.). Internet Defamation Consequences: Everything You Need to Know. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://mullenlawfirm.com/internet-defamation-consequences/#:~:text=Numerous%20U.S.%20states%20have%20made,statement%20remains%20highly%20frowned%20upon
Napoli, P. M. (1999). The Marketplace of Ideas Metaphor In Communications Regulation. Journal of Communication, 49, 151-169.
Napoli, P.M. (2008). Media policy. In W. Donsbach (Ed), The international encyclopedia of communication (pp. 2969-2980). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
Napoli, P.M. (2015). Social Media and the Public Interest: Governance of News Platforms in the Realm of Individual and Algorithmic Gatekeepers. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 751-760. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2481886
National Security Council. (2021). National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. Washington, DC: National Security Council. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/National-Strategy-for-Countering-Domestic-Terrorism.pdf
Naughton, J. (2017, January 8). How two congressmen created the internet’s biggest names. The Guardian. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/08/how-two-congressmen-created-the-internets-biggest-names
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C., Eddy, K., & Nielsen, R. (2022). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2022. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Digital_News-Report_2022.pdf
Ng, A., & Solsman, J.E. (2018, July 18). Facebook's InfoWars, fake news, Alex Jones problems aren't going away. CNET. Retrieved December 31, 2022, from https://www.cnet.com/culture/internet/facebooks-infowars-fake-news-alex-jones-problems-arent-going-away/
NSPCC. (n.d.). Content promoting self-harm, suicide and eating disorders. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://www.nspcc.org.uk/keeping-children-safe/online-safety/inappropriate-explicit-content/promotion-self-harm/
OFCOM. (2018, April 25). Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes Report. London, UK: OFCOM. Retrieved January 9, 2023, from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/113222/Adults-Media-Use-and-Attitudes-Report-2018.pdf
OFCOM. (2023, September 19). Ofcom welcomes the Online Safety Bill passing final stage in parliament. London, UK: OFCOM. Retrieved October 6, 2023, from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centre/2023/ofcom-welcomes-the-online-safety-bill-passing-final-stage-in-parliament
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York, NY: Crown.
Open Rights Group. (2015, May 30). The Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability Background Paper. Retrieved January 20, 2023, from https://www.eff.org/files/2015/07/08/manila_principles_background_paper.pdf
Open Rights Group (2022, November 30). Who’s Checking on your Chats in Private Online Spaces? Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://www.openrightsgroup.org/publications/whos-checking-on-your-chats-in-private-online-spaces/
Pamment, J. (2020, July 15). The EU’s Role in Fighting Disinformation: Taking Back the Initiative. Retrieved January 8, 2023, from https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/07/15/eu-s-role-in-fighting-disinformation-taking-back-initiative-pub-82286
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199999736.001.0001
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Peckham, S. (2022, March 23). What are content farms and are they harmful?. Retrieved January 14, 2023, from https://www.internetmatters.org/hub/news-blogs/what-is-content-farm-how-harmful/
Penfrat, J. (2021, March 24). Delete first, think later. Retrieved December 31, 2022, from https://edri.org/our-work/delete-first-think-later-dsa/
Picard, R. and Pickard, V. (2017). Essential Principles for Contemporary Media and Communications Policymaking. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford. Retrieved April 23, 2023, from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/research/files/Essential%2520Principles%2520for%2520Contemporary%2520Media%2520and%2520Communications%2520Policymaking.pdf
Pillalamarri, A., & Stanley, C. (2021, December 8). Online Content Regulation: An International Comparison. Retrieved March 11, 2023 from https://studentbriefs.law.gwu.edu/ilpb/2021/12/08/online-content-regulation-an-international-comparison/
Pirius, R. (n.d.). Inciting to Riot, Violence, or Insurrection. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/inciting-to-riot-violence-or-insurrection.html#:~:text=Criminal%20incitement%20refers%20to%20conduct,riot%2C%20violence%2C%20or%20insurrection.&text=The%20First%20Amendment%20guards%20citizens,and%20to%20petition%20the%20government
Price, M. E., Verhulst, S. G. & Morgan, L. (2015). Routledge handbook of media law. London, UK: Routledge.
Puppis, M. (2010). Media Governance: A New Concept for the Analysis of Media Policy and Regulation. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3, 134–149. DOI: 10.1111/j.1753-9137.2010.01063.x
Quandt, T., Frischlich, L., Boberg, S., & Schatto‐Eckrodt, T. (2019). Fake news. In Vos, T., Hanusch, F., Dimitrakopoulou, D., Geertsema-Sligh, M., & Sehl, A. (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies (pp. 1-6). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Rawson, C. (2021). What is the law on revenge porn? Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.stephensons.co.uk/site/blog/criminal-justice-blog/what-is-the-law-on-revenge-porn
Reid, J. (2022, September 14). Google loses appeal over EU antitrust ruling, but fine cut to $4.12 billion. CNBC. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/14/eu-court-backs-antitrust-ruling-against-google-but-reduces-fine.html
Renda, A. (2018). The legal framework to address ‘fake news’: possible policy actions at the EU level (PE 619.013). Brussels, Belgium: Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2018/619013/IPOL_IDA(2018)619013_EN.pdf
Report Harmful Content. (n.d.a.). Bullying and Harassment. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://reportharmfulcontent.com/advice/bullying-or-harassment/
Report Harmful Content. (n.d.b.). Pornographic Content. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://reportharmfulcontent.com/advice/pornographic-content/
Rodríguez de Las Heras Ballell, T. (2021). The background of the Digital Services Act: Looking towards a platform economy. ERA Forum, 22, 75-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-021-00654-w
Romano, A. (2018, Jul, 2). A new law intended to curb sex trafficking threatens the future of the internet as we know it. Vox. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/4/13/17172762/fosta-sesta-backpage-230-internet-freedom
Rottman, G., & Rowland, L. (2013, August 1). New Proposal Could Singlehandedly Cripple Free Speech Online. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/new-proposal-could-singlehandedly-cripple-free
Runde, D., & Ramanujam, S. (2021, October 1). Global Digital Governance: Here’s What You Need to Know. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://www.csis.org/analysis/global-digital-governance-heres-what-you-need-know
Rya, M., Nakashima, E., & DeYoung, K. (2016, December 29). Obama administration announces measures to punish Russia for 2016 election interference. The Washington Post. Retrieved December 29, 2022, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-announces-measures-to-punish-russia-for-2016-election-interference/2016/12/29/311db9d6-cdde-11e6-a87f-b917067331bb_story.html?utm_term=.421db51a055c
Sandle, P. (2022, November 29). UK ditches ban on 'legal but harmful' online content in favour of free speech. Reuters. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-ditches-ban-legal-harmful-online-content-favour-free-speech-2022-11-28/
Satariano, A., & Schuetze, C. (2022, September 23). Where Online Hate Speech Can Bring the Police to Your Door. The New York Times. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/23/technology/germany-internet-speech-arrest.html
Savino, E. M. (2017). Fake News: No One Is Liable, and That Is a Problem. Buff. L. Rev., 65, 1101. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview/vol65/iss5/6
Schroeder, J. (2019, September 11). ‘Marketplace of ideas’ turns 100 — it’s not what it used to be. The Hill. Retrieved January 12, 2023, from https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/469715-as-marketplace-of-ideas-turns-100-truth-is-not-what-it-used-to-be/
Schultz, D., & Hudson, D. (2017, June). Marketplace of Ideas. Retrieved January 12, 2023, from https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/999/marketplace-of-ideas
Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport & Secretary of State for the Home Department. (2020). Online Harms White Paper: Full government response to the consultation (Command Paper Number: 354). London, UK: UK government. Retrieved January 6, 2023, from https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/online-harms-white-paper/outcome/online-harms-white-paper-full-government-response#joint-ministerial-foreword
Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, & Secretary of State for the Home Department. (2019). Online Harms White Paper (CP 57). London, UK: APS Group. Retrieved January 9, 2023, from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/973939/Online_Harms_White_Paper_V2.pdf
Soll, J. (2016, December 18). The Long and Brutal History of Fake News. Politico Magazine. Retrieved December 29, 2022, from https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/fake-news-history-long-violent-214535/
Solon, O., & Levin, S. (2016, December 16). How Google's search algorithm spreads false information with a rightwing bias. The Guardian. Retrieved December 30, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/16/google-autocomplete-rightwing-bias-algorithm-political-propaganda
Stamp, N. (2021). Can you Sue for Defamation on Social Media? Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.igniyte.co.uk/blog/can-you-sue-for-defamation-on-social-media/
Statista Research Department. (2022, November 17). Fake news in Germany - statistics & facts. Retrieved December 31, 2022, from https://www.statista.com/topics/5201/fake-news-in-germany/#topicOverview
Stewart, E. (2018, April 23). The next big battle over internet freedom is here. Vox. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/23/17237640/fosta-sesta-section-230-internet-freedom
Stewart, E. (2019, May 16). Ron Wyden wrote the law that built the internet. He still stands by it — and everything it’s brought with it. Vox. Retrieved January 5, 2023, from https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/16/18626779/ron-wyden-section-230-facebook-regulations-neutrality
Stolton, S. (2020, October 12). Digital Services Act should avoid rules on ‘harmful’ content, Big Tech tells EU. Euractiv. Retrieved January 2, 2023, from https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/digital-services-act-should-avoid-rules-on-harmful-content-big-tech-tells-eu/
The Santa Clara Principles. (n.d.). The Santa Clara Principles. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://santaclaraprinciples.org/
The United States Department of Justice. (n.d.). Citizen’s Guide to U.S. Federal Law on Child Pornography. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-child-pornography
Trengove, M., Kazim, E., Almeida, D., Hilliard, A., Zannone, S., & Lomas, E. (2022). A critical review of the Online Safety Bill. Patterns, 3(8), 100544. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100544
Turillazzi, A., Casolari, F., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2022). The Digital Services Act: An Analysis of Its Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications. SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4007389
Tworek, H., & Leerssen, P. (2019). An Analysis of Germany's NetzDG Law. Transatlantic High Level Working Group on Content Moderation Online and Freedom of Expression. Retrieved from https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=3dc07e3e-a988-4f61-bb8c-388d903504a7
United Nations. (n.d.). What is hate speech. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/understanding-hate-speech/what-is-hate-speech
United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund. (n.d.). Protecting children online. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://www.unicef.org/protection/violence-against-children-online
United States Courts. (n.d.). What Does Free Speech Mean? Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does
ur Rehman, I. (2019). Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data harvesting: What you need to know. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2497, 1-11. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2497
van Dijck, J. (2020). Governing digital societies: Private platforms, public values. Computer Law & Security Review, 36, 105377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105377
van Mill, D. (2021). Freedom of Speech. In Zalta, E. (Spring 2021 Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/freedom-speech/
Volokh, E. (2021). Treating Social Media Platforms Like Common Carriers? Journal of Free Speech Law, 1, 377-462.
Wardle, C. (2017, February 16). Fake news. It’s complicated. First Draft. Retrieved January 7, 2023, from https://firstdraftnews.org/articles/fake-news-complicated/
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking (Vol. 27, pp. 1-107). Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://firstdraftnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/PREMS-162317-GBR-2018-Report-de%CC%81sinformation-1.pdf?x29719
Waters, P. (2020, June 15). It’s Time for an Internet that Supports our Democracy. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://demofund.wpengine.com/idea/its-time-for-an-internet-that-supports-our-democracy/
Watson, C. (2018). Information Literacy in a Fake/False News World: An Overview of the Characteristics of Fake News and its Historical Development. International Journal of Legal Information, 46(2), 93-96. DOI:10.1017/jli.2018.25
Welchman, L. (2015). Managing Chaos Digital Governance by Design. Brooklyn, NY: Rosenfeld Media. Retrieved from https://rosenfeldmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ManagingChaos-Ch1.pdf
Wheeler, T. (2023). The Supreme Court takes up Section 230. Retrieved March 26, 2023, from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2023/01/31/the-supreme-court-takes-up-section-230/
Wicker, T. (2021, September 3). Online platforms: ‘notice and takedown’ procedures at heart of updated EU rules. Retrieved December 30, 2022, from https://www.ibanet.org/Online-platforms-notice-and-takedown-procedures-at%20heart-of-updated-EU-rules
Wolford, B. (2018, April 18). Concerned about SESTA-FOSTA? Learn how Proton Mail protects your privacy. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from https://proton.me/blog/sesta-fosta-email-privacy
Woods, L., & McGlynn, C. (2022). Pornography platforms, the EU Digital Services Act and Image-Based Sexual Abuse. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2022/01/26/pornography-platforms-the-eu-digital-services-act-and-image-based-sexual-abuse/
World Wide Web Foundation. (2017, March 12). Three challenges for the web, according to its inventor. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://webfoundation.org/2017/03/web-turns-28-letter/
Wu, T. (2018). Is the First Amendment Obsolete? Columbia Public Law Research Paper, No. 14-573, 15-61.
Zhou, M. (2018, July 27). Facebook: We’ve removed hundreds of posts under German hate speech law. CNET. Retrieved December 31, 2022, from https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/facebook-weve-removed-hundreds-of-posts-under-german-hate-speech-law/
Zhu, X. (2022, June 13). Online Safety Bill- illegal and harmful content and safety duties. Retrieved February 3, 2023, from https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/interface/2022/the-online-safety-bill---the-uks-answer-to-addressing-online-harms/online-safety-bill-illegal-and-harmful-content-and-safety-duties
Zingales, L., & Morton, F. (2019, November 8). Why a New Digital Authority Is Necessary. ProMarket. Retrieved December 30, 2022, from https://www.promarket.org/2019/11/08/why-a-new-digital-authority-is-necessary/
Zittrain, J. (2019). Three Eras of Digital Governance. SSRN Journal. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3458435
電子全文 電子全文(網際網路公開日期:20281019)
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊