Should critique on governmental policy regarding Covid-19 be tolerated on online platforms? An analysis of recent case-law in the Netherlands.
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Should critique on governmental policy regarding Covid-19 be tolerated on online platforms? An analysis of recent case-law in the Netherlands. / van der Donk, Berdien B E.
I: Journal of Human Rights Practice, Bind 13, Nr. 2, 2022, s. 426-432.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Should critique on governmental policy regarding Covid-19 be tolerated on online platforms? An analysis of recent case-law in the Netherlands.
AU - van der Donk, Berdien B E
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - This policy and practice note describes and discusses two recent decisions by the District Court in Amsterdam regarding the applicability of YouTube’s and Facebook’s Community Guidelines on Covid-19 misinformation. The decisions (Café Weltschmerz/YouTube and Smart Exit/Facebook ) illustrate the tense intersection between, on the one hand, the possibility to express critique on the government’s policy to fight the outbreak of Covid-19 in the Netherlands, and on the other hand, the prevention of (dis)information with the potential to harm public health. The author will point out that the two decisions, although covering merely the same subject matter, differ significantly in argumentation regarding the (scope of the) application of the freedom of expression. Analysing this divergence in argumentation will show that the root of the difference can be traced back to a different valuation of the role of the online platforms regarding the dissemination of speech. A debate on this divergence is needed to prevent inconsistency in future decisions and contributes to the broader discussion on content regulation in the European Union.
AB - This policy and practice note describes and discusses two recent decisions by the District Court in Amsterdam regarding the applicability of YouTube’s and Facebook’s Community Guidelines on Covid-19 misinformation. The decisions (Café Weltschmerz/YouTube and Smart Exit/Facebook ) illustrate the tense intersection between, on the one hand, the possibility to express critique on the government’s policy to fight the outbreak of Covid-19 in the Netherlands, and on the other hand, the prevention of (dis)information with the potential to harm public health. The author will point out that the two decisions, although covering merely the same subject matter, differ significantly in argumentation regarding the (scope of the) application of the freedom of expression. Analysing this divergence in argumentation will show that the root of the difference can be traced back to a different valuation of the role of the online platforms regarding the dissemination of speech. A debate on this divergence is needed to prevent inconsistency in future decisions and contributes to the broader discussion on content regulation in the European Union.
KW - Faculty of Law
KW - content regulation
KW - covid-19
KW - freedom of expression
KW - online platforms
KW - drafting of user terms
U2 - 10.1093/jhuman/huab025
DO - 10.1093/jhuman/huab025
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 35432599
VL - 13
SP - 426
EP - 432
JO - Journal of Human Rights Practice
JF - Journal of Human Rights Practice
SN - 1757-9619
IS - 2
ER -
ID: 251635622