The media exemption is now in the EUROPEAN MEDIA FREEDOM ACT
Discussions on the European media Freedom Act now include an extended version of the media exemption.
This new media exemption would prevent platforms to remove or reduce the visibility of disinformation if published by a media.
The media exemption was rejected from the DSA
MEPs rejected Amendment 511 in the DSA that would have created a de facto Media Exemption. This amendment was opening the door to what Maria Ressa called “industrial-scale disinformation” and we welcome this decision.
Tackling disinformation is a complex and technical matter. The DSA could still be improved during inter-institutional discussions on other crucial articles. We will be coming back to you on these.
We would like to thank you, the disinfo and digital rights community for your outstanding help on this campaign. Without your support, it would not have been possible for the many avatars of the media exemption to be rejected.
Lastly, we would like to deeply thank Maria Ressa and Frances Haugen. Their fight against censorship and for accountability inspires us every day.
The media exemption amendments: 511 and 513
New amendments (511/Recital 38 and 513/Article 12) to the Digital Services Act propose to create a de facto media exemption from content moderation.
A huge new bureaucracy protecting both media giants and big tech
- Platforms will not remove any post by a media – including poorly-defined “media”, self-proclaimed “media”, and licensed propaganda – fearing the length of the process and the associated cost, thus offering a motorway for any “media”, including state-influenced media, to disinform without any form of supervision;
- Platforms would at the same time comply with the DSA’s new article 12 and recital 38 BUT would be breaching articles 26, 27 and 35 on Risk Assessments, Mitigation of risks and Codes of Conduct, requiring them to moderate the very same content. This would undermine any progress made by the Code of Practice on Disinformation and derail its efforts.
- Meanwhile, platforms will increase their revenue derived from the monetisation of disinformation, while reducing their content moderation costs, thus overall maximising their profits – with the legal backing of the EU.
Such proposals would reverse years of progress in the fight against hate speech and disinformation online. It would provide by default a legal protection to all content published by a “media”, a very vague definition that could englobe anyone.
DSA: Reject amendments 511 and 513
They also oppose the media exemption
DSA: no to Media exemption
The Media Exemption would give a free pass on this disinformation
Resources
Fact-checkers and experts call on MEPS to reject a media exemption in the DSA
Journalists, fact-checkers, and disinformation researchers urge MEPs to reject any DSA proposal that would include a media exemption.
The role of “media” in producing and spreading disinformation campaigns
Quality journalism and honest reporting bring crucial facts to the public. But, in numerous cases, “media” (whether self-depicted or registered) have played a role in
