Author
Listed:
- Kobernjuk Anna
(Tallinn Law School, Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, Tallinn 12618, Estonia)
- Kasper Agnes
(Tallinn Law School, Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, Tallinn 12618, Estonia)
Abstract
With the rapid growth of disinformation, two major steps were taken to battle the phenomenon in the online environment—first on the global level, and second on the European Union level. The first step is the Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda, which provides a general overview of possible actions to be taken to fight disinformation, and how “things should be”. The steps are connected to following human rights standards, promoting the diversity of media, and paying special attention to intermediaries and media outlets. The second one is the Code of Practice on Disinformation, which is a self-regulatory document that can be voluntarily signed by major social media platforms and advertising bodies, and its main focus is making political advertising coherent and clear, preventing the creation of fake accounts, providing users with tools to report disinformation, and promote further research. Nevertheless, based on the reports and criticism from stakeholders, the Code of Practice has not reached a common ground regarding definitions, it has provided no mechanism to access the development, and has had several other drawbacks which need additional attention and discussion. The article is devoted to identifying gaps in the Code of Practice on Disinformation based on the reports and criticism provided by the stakeholders and elaborating on possible practices to regulate the legal issues raised by disinformation on the European Union level. We use doctrinal and comparative methods in the work. The doctrinal method targets the cluster that was identified in order to analyze the Code of Practice, identifies weak spots and inconsistencies, and offers solutions from different areas of law. The comparative method was selected since in several areas of law, such as human rights and consumer protection law, the previously identified approaches will be addressed to find the best outcomes. This combination of methods allows an in-depth understanding of legal documents and identifying successful solutions, which can influence further development based on efficient examples.
Suggested Citation
Kobernjuk Anna & Kasper Agnes, 2021.
"Normativity in the EU’s Approach towards Disinformation,"
TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 170-202, May.
Handle:
RePEc:vrs:bjeust:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:170-202:n:4
DOI: 10.2478/bjes-2021-0011
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:bjeust:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:170-202:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.