How much power do social networks have?
After Donald Trump's account was blocked on numerous platforms, there is a discussion about whether something like this should not be controlled.
After the events in Washington,
Donald Trump is
at war with social networks.
So the accounts of the
US President are
blocked.
Unproblematic?
Not really.
There is massive
interference by private companies
in what are actually democratic processes.
A media lawyer explains how far
social networks
like Twitter & Co. can go.
Munich / Washington -
Donald Trump
hit the keys
more than 56,000 times
for his Twitter account until the platform blocked his profile a week ago.
During the last few meters of his presidency, numerous other Internet platforms blocked him - in addition to Facebook and Instagram, YouTube and Snapchat.
Meanwhile, many other state leaders are allowed to continue
propaganda online
.
Discussions have flared up around the world: Who decides what can be said on the Internet?
And what are the rules?
Twitter justified the decision with the "risk of further incitement to violence" after the
storm of the Capitol
in Washington by Trump supporters.
Chancellor Angela Merkel, however, considers the blocking of his Twitter profile to be "problematic" - because such steps must be taken within a legal framework, said her government spokesman Steffen Seibert.
France's Minister of Economic Affairs, Bruno Le Maire, also believes that such decisions should not be left to companies.
Donald Trump blocked on Twitter and Co.: The basic problem of social networks
“There is a basic problem that has to be understood,” says
Tobias Gostomzyk
, professor for media law at the Technical University of Dortmund.
“Social networks are private companies that act primarily for economic purposes - that is, primarily to
attract the attention of users
,
collect user data
and place
advertising.
“At the same time, Facebook, Twitter and Co. are also of great importance for public information and communication.
"If politicians want to reach a large audience digitally, for example, they cannot ignore social networks."
+
After the run on the Capitol, Twitter blocked Donald Trump's account.
© Olivier DOULIERY / AFP
Platforms could decide for themselves which posts are deleted - and which have a high reach.
As a result, there are always
interference in democratic processes
- this also applies, for example, to the extent to which election advertising can be distributed on Twitter shortly before elections.
“When Trump was blocked, the CEOs spoke up themselves - as if that were their own private decision.
And it is about socially relevant communication that should be judged according to transparent standards. "
Reach on social networks: Facebook and Twitter as US export hits
The operators of the networks could now also have
arguments
if they do not act in similar situations in the future in the same way as with Trump, says the media lawyer.
The Russian politician Dmitri Medvedev, for example, carried out propaganda on Twitter in relation to the attack on Crimea.
Iran's ex-president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spreads conspiracy theories online, and the Syrian presidency also has an account on Twitter.
"Of course, it's more tricky for social networks when it comes to the President of the United States," says Gostomzyk.
“After all, Facebook and Twitter are American companies that are - if you like - an export hit worldwide.” There is a risk that Europe will become a digital colony of the USA.
You have to work on solutions:
algorithms could become more transparent
.
"Perhaps we also need supervisory bodies that are staffed with experts and can help shape the rules of social networks." However, they should only be limited to "extreme cases": "For example, when calling for violence".
Just because of public safety, he considers the blocking of Trump's account to be justifiable.
List of rubric lists: © Olivier DOULIERY / AFP
