Human Rights and Private Actors in the Online Domain

Jørgensen, Rikke Frank

doi:10.1017/9781316838952.011

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In relation to freedom of expression, state action has traditionally been an essential element of alleged human rights violations. For example, if a state orders a private platform to remove content, this constitutes a violation of the right to freedom of expression under human rights law unless the order is provided by law and necessary to pursue a legitimate aim; however, when a platform decides to remove content because it violates its terms of service, this is private action outside the direct reach of human rights law (Jørgensen, 2018). Legally speaking, the relationship between the platform and the user is governed by the terms of service (contract law), rather than human rights law.…”

Section: The Human Rights Impact Of Social Media Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Part of the regulatory challenge with social media platforms like Facebook occurs because their services resemble a public sphere (Jørgensen, 2018;Moore, 2016;York & Zuckerman, 2019) yet operate purely within the remit of private law. As illustrated by the Danish YouGov survey, Facebook has established itself as a significant venue for public debate in the country, with almost half (48%) of the respondents stating that they find Facebook to be "an important platform for the public debate in Denmark".…”

Section: Protecting Freedom Of Expression On Facebookmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Private Governance of Freedom of Expression on Social Media Platforms: EU content regulation through the lens of human rights standards

Jørgensen

Zuleta

2020

Nordicom Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For years, social media platforms have been perceived as a democratic gain, facilitating freedom of expression, easy access to a variety of information, and new means of public participation. At the same time, social media have enabled the dissemination of illegal content and incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence, fuelling several content regulation initiatives. From the perspective of freedom of expression, this development embraces two challenges: first, private actors govern freedom of expression, without human rights safeguards; second, this privatised governance of human rights is encouraged and legitimised by a broad range of EU policy initiatives. Informed by an analysis of Danish Facebook users’ attitudes toward public debate on Facebook, we pose the question: How do social media companies such as Facebook balance various human rights considerations on their platforms, particularly in relation to freedom of expression? We analyse the abovementioned challenges through a human rights lens, which serves as the analytical framework for this article. Further, we suggest some strategies for moving forward, drawing on recent recommendations from the UN human rights system.

show abstract

Section: The Human Rights Impact Of Social Media Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Protecting Freedom Of Expression On Facebookmentioning

confidence: 99%

Private Governance of Freedom of Expression on Social Media Platforms: EU content regulation through the lens of human rights standards

Jørgensen

Zuleta

2020

Nordicom Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This duty to protect is a central pillar of human rights law and was recently reaffirmed in the reports of John Ruggie, who served as the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative for Business and Human Rights from 2005 to 2011. The approach that Ruggie advocated, which was eventually affirmed by the UN Human Rights Council in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, puts primary emphasis on the state's obligation to regulate business to protect rights (Jørgensen 2018;Ruggie 2011).…”

Section: Current Approaches To Business and Human Rights Onlinementioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating Private Harms Online: Content Regulation under Human Rights Law

Land¹

2019

Human Rights in the Age of Platforms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…governments make requests that may violate international human rights standards on freedom of expression and privacy; for example, requests for content removal that are not lawful, legitimate and proportionate (Jørgensen, 2018). In 2016, the Telecommunication Industry Network, a coalition of European internet and telecommunication providers, joined the GNI.…”

Section: Human Rights Impact Assessment In the Ict Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As for the GNI, which includes some of the most powerful companies within the sector, their approach to consideration of human rights focuses exclusively on freedom of expression and privacy. Moreover, the guidelines developed by the GNI are oriented towards government interference, whereas corporate practices outside the governmentcompany axe are left unaddressed (Jørgensen, 2018). As such, the risk assessments conducted pursuant to the GNI guidelines tend not to scrutinize the full range of business practices and procedures for their potential human rights impacts; for example, how the companies' terms of service may impact negatively on specific rights, whether their algorithms may discriminate against certain user groups, and how a potential negative impact may be remediated.…”

Section: Human Rights Impact Assessment In the Ict Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the role of HRIA in the information and communication technologies (ICT) sector

Jørgensen¹,

Veiberg²,

Oever³

2019

Handbook on Human Rights Impact Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The material cannot be used for any other purpose without further permission of the publisher, and is for private use only. 2/16that influence what information is seen online, result from private endeavour' (UNHRC, 2016b). One area of concern is the self-regulatory measures of these corporate platforms, such as blocking of alleged illegal or harmful content. The concern is particularly related to the platforms' means of 'content regulation' and privacy practices; for example, their day-today decisions on which content to remove or leave up, and the extent to which they collect, process, and exchange personal data with third parties. Similar issues are at hand at 'lower layers' of the services where companies in the business of providing internet infrastructure and hardware decide on the protocols and standards that influence what is, and what is not, possible on the internet (Cath & Floridi, 2017). Scholars and civil society groups have warned of a governance gap, where private actors with strong human rights impacts steer in the soft regime of guidelines and corporate social responsibility, with no legally binding human rights obligations, except when human rights issues have been transposed into national or regional legislation (see, e.g., Callamard, 2018;Laidlaw, 2015). The 2016 European Union (EU, 2016) General Data Protection Regulation, for example, stipulates privacy and data protection rules on companies doing business in EU member states.

show abstract

Human Rights and Private Actors in the Online Domain

Cited by 5 publications

References 19 publications

Private Governance of Freedom of Expression on Social Media Platforms: EU content regulation through the lens of human rights standards

Private Governance of Freedom of Expression on Social Media Platforms: EU content regulation through the lens of human rights standards

Regulating Private Harms Online: Content Regulation under Human Rights Law

Exploring the role of HRIA in the information and communication technologies (ICT) sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About