Anyone in DC looking for suggestions on what to do about social media companies’ harm on society? Want to police algorithms and increase transparency on what everyone sees online. Here’s a quick guide to EU’s Digital Services Act proposals that do just that 👇
Reminder: these rules will likely get passed in first half of 2022. They have changed since first being announced in December, 2020, but hit on everything @FrancesHaugen touched on today in terms of algorithmic and data accountability
And unlike similar content moderation proposals put of Canada, UK or Germany, they balance free speech and online protection that, imo, is a pretty good balance
Hat tip to the mandatory outside audit of potential harmful behaviors and requirements to outline what companies will do about that if/when things goes wrong
Also love me some algorithmic accountability, including linked proposals (👇) that mostly force social media companies to offer more insight into what is shown in news feeds and why we are all targeted — if they want to reduce potential fines of up to 6% of global revenue
Just saying: you don’t have to reinvent the wheel.
Or, you know, we could just bicker about social media “censorship,” or how these companies aren’t taking down enough content. Yeah. That would be good, too.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Part One looks at EU Reporter, a Brussels-based media organization and its undisclosed ties to foreign governments and companies eagerly promoting themselves within the EU halls of power politico.eu/article/brusse…
Part Two looks specifically at how @Huawei used media organizations to lobby EU (and Belgian) officials without disclosing those associations politico.eu/article/huawei…
ICYMI -- a deal to fundamentally overhaul the global tax system is expected to be announced tomorrow. It would rewrite domestic laws & international treaties, forcing the likes of @Google & @Facebook to pay more, globally, where they operate.
<<Cracks knucles>> cue thread
This comes down to who gets the right to tax the world's largest companies on their global operations: these firms' home jurisidictions, or countries that are home to these companies' actual customers.
In short, it's a question of sovereignty.
Friday's deal will be viewed as global. But, it really isn't. It's come down to a fight between the US (and its tech giants) and Europe (and its push to reclaim tax revenue from these companies)
US & EU senior officials meet today in Pittsburgh to talk tech & trade. It's part of efforts to rebuild the transatlantic relation after Trump's 4 years.
Here's a thread on what you need to know about today's meeting and what it means for US-US relations.
<<cracks knuckles>>
First, the basics. The EU-US Trade and Tech Council was an idea dreamed up by @EU_Commission president Ursula von der Leyen to pigeonhole US thinking about digital policymaking and trade. The goal: to get DC to follow Brussels' lead
That, obviously, did not happen. The US quickly pivoted the conversation to "let's use this against China!," including efforts to stop Beijing from buying up EU & US companies and creating a Western alliance to set the next generation of tech/trade standards
After talking to folk today, two things have become very clear: UK govt is willing to walk away from its adequacy deal w/ EU; almost no one with power in London understands how privacy regulations work
There is a feeling within part of UK govt that GDPR has been a hindrance to growth (it has not); and that business wants more freedom to “innovate” (most do, but not at expense of privacy rights)
But what is missing is context. The UK’s data protection regimes is decades old, is based on existing (EU-based) global norms and, for the most part, has worked.
Current scenes in Brussels after London announces it wants to reach a international data deal w/ the US (and Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Kenya, South Korea, India & Singapore)
Fun fact: while the UK is pursuing these post-Brexit deals (as is its right), if such agreements leads to EU data being transferred to third-party countries that don't have adequacy deals w/ EU, then the UK's own deal w/ the EU could be in jeopardy
Worth remembering that the EU has tried to get a data deal done w/ Australia for years, but Canberra has been unwilling to meet Brussels' demands (as is its right). Also: EU's future data deal w/ US still very much up in the air.
Two things are pretty clear. 1) Taliban continue is all over social media. 2) Western far-right groups have embraced the militants' message as their own.
Read all about how that's shaking out in this week's Digital Bridge newsletter 👉 politico.eu/newsletter/dig…
.@Facebook's publication of a new (US-focused) transparency report has again got people talking about how to hold these companies to account.
FWIW, both EU & US officials are (finally) putting pen to paper 👇
.@Apple really screwed the pooch on announcing plans to scan ppl's images for sexually explicit material. But as US & EU officials gather in Washington next week to discuss encryption, the iPhone maker's attempts at finding a middle group btwn privacy & security are worth a look