The clash of empires: regulating technological threats to civil society

Support for misinformation regulation on social media: It is the perceived harm of misinformation that matters, not the perceived amount

“…Second, as the regulatory power shifts from platforms to external actors, it is unclear how these actors can be held accountable and how abuses power can be avoided (Chin et al, 2022). For instance, legal restrictions such as criminalizing disinformation could be used in the service of authoritarianism by limiting free speech (Dowdeswell & Goltz, 2020). Finally, social media platforms have created dependencies by providing critical infrastructure to reach citizens and audiences and gather their attention.…”

“…Due to these dependencies, it is unclear if these actors will always arrive at conclusions that are in the best interest of users and citizens. It has therefore been argued that regulatory “solutions need to empower users—not organizations, companies, or states” (Dowdeswell & Goltz, 2020, p. 209).…”

From the ecocalypse to the infocalypse: The importance of building a new culture of protecting the infosphere

“…We suspect putting a price on the infosphere pollution or using some forms of negative freedom constraints (Berlin, 1959) will not be the most effective way to protect our infosphere. As Dowdeswell & Goltz (2020) point out, all the current regulating approaches merely redistribute the power between one empire with another: the state vs. big tech companies, while discounting the end user. Thus, learning from our experiences in the recent decades of struggling to find a green growth solution means that we need to look beyond the economic, legal, and technological solutions to find solutions for the infosphere.…”