12 May 2022
The War in Ukraine, Fake News, and the Digital Epistemic Divide
The ongoing war in Ukraine sheds light on crucial challenges of our digital media landscape. The social media-driven “(mis)information wars” surrounding the Russian invasion expose a growing epistemic divide running through liberal democracies. The regulatory focus on truth, with measures like fact-checking, serves little to cure the larger problems behind this. We should rather use the power of the law to devise new modes of intelligent speech regulation mimicking the functions formerly played by the centralized set-up of communication conditions. Continue reading >>
0 
22 April 2022
Elon Musk Wants to Buy Twitter to Create a Free Speech Utopia: Now What?
The enigmatic Tesla founder Elon Musk has made a public offer to buy 100% of Twitter’s shares at approximately 138% of each share’s value. In his letter of intention submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Musk describes that free speech is necessary in a democratic society, and he wishes to unlock its full potential by bringing Twitter under (his) private ownership. Constitutionally this raises an interesting point: if indeed a billionaire wants to change the rules of speech on the ‘new public squares’ by acquiring a social media platform, can he – and should he be able to? Continue reading >>21 April 2022
Shareholder Power as a Constitutionalising Force: Elon Musk’s Bid to Buy Twitter
On 14 April 2022, billionaire Elon Musk came with one of his extravagant ideas: he offered to buy Twitter. According to Musk, who is already majority shareholder, the bid was motivated by his will to fully “unlock” the online platform’s potential as a space for free speech across the globe. This episode calls for a reflection on the future of online platforms as digital spaces for the flourishing of public debate and democracy. Continue reading >>
0
25 March 2022
Brazilian Judicial Branch v. Telegram (and Bolsonaro)
On March 18, 2022, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes suspended Telegram’s functioning in Brazil through an individual injunction. In brief, the platform was blocked because its owners ignored their duty to cooperate with the Brazilian state in the repression of the illicit activities committed over the platform. However, only analyzing the issue’s core misses one of its essential surrounding elements: the direct interest of President Jair Bolsonaro in the free operation of the platform and the growing antagonism between him and Justice Alexandre de Moraes. Continue reading >>
0
04 October 2021
Neutralitätspflichten von Behörden im Wahlkampf
Einige Ministerien sollen im Vorfeld der Bundestagswahl Wählerinnen und Wähler mit zielgruppenspezifisch zugeschnittenen Botschaften auf Facebook angesprochen haben. Ein solches Microtrageting wäre als ein Einsatz amtlicher Ressourcen für den Wahlkampf zu qualifizieren und damit ein eklatanter Verfassungsverstoß. Die Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zur Neutralitätspflicht von Hoheitsträgern bietet Anhaltspunkte für die verfassungsrechtliche Einordnung dieses Verhaltens. Continue reading >>14 September 2021
Legalizing Disinformation
On 6 September 2021, Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro enacted a provisional measure (an executive order with immediate legal force and a deadline of 120 days for Congress ratification) which replaced several norms of the so called “Brazilian Internet Bill of Rights”. Bypassing the legislative, Bolsonaro avoided the political debate concerning social media regulation to continue his deeply problematic use of these tools. The provisional measure is unconstitutional for formal and material reasons. Continue reading >>
0
19 August 2021
Swipe up for the German Federal Constitutional Court on Instagram
Shortly before noon on 18 August, on an ordinary Wednesday, the German Federal Constitutional Court quietly but firmly took the plunge into the unknown: it published a press release announcing its opening of an official account on Instagram on the occasion of its 70th anniversary. This decision has attracted significant public attention, not only because it promises “exciting insights into the work of Germany’s highest court” but also because the new visual turn of the GFCC is in line with a wider development in the use of social media by courts and judicial storytelling. Continue reading >>12 January 2021
Letzter Vorhang für @realdonaldtrump
Dem amerikanischen Präsidenten wurde mit seinem Twitter-Account die große Bühne genommen Ihre Entscheidung war angesichts der beispiellosen Eskalation der Ereignisse in Washington nicht nur rechtmäßig, sondern richtig und im Grunde überfällig. Ein Stück über Macht und soziale Medien Continue reading >>31 October 2020
On Publishers, Carriers, and Bookstores
The next American election is just days away, so you’d think that most American politicians would be focusing on campaigning either for their own election (or re-election) or for their colleagues and allies who are running now to attain or retain elective office. But not this week. Weirdly enough, the United States Senate took time off from campaigning—even though the official election date is next Tuesday, and millions of American voters are voting in advance of the election or have already voted—to host a hearing whose nominal purpose was to discuss whether a formerly obscure but now hotly disputed statute known as “Section 230,” which plays a central role in limiting legal liability for internet services, needs to be updated. Continue reading >>
0
06 July 2020