As the digital information landscape increasingly shapes global populations' perceptions of political and social developments, Western governments are attempting to implement stricter content moderation policies that uphold democratic principles like free speech while combating disinformation, hate speech and incitement of violence. However, government-enforced moderation efforts often spark resentment from societies that perceive state-level interference in social media domains as an infringement on their rights. As a result, Western governments are left with few viable options to reduce malign content in the short term.
In the absence of effective government action, the tech giants behind social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, WhatsApp, X (formally Twitter), YouTube and TikTok are becoming the predominant regulators of how social narratives are shaped and disseminated. To this end, social media companies employ a variety of algorithms to shape users' experiences and filter the content they see. The exact parameters behind these algorithmic tools are opaque but ultimately aimed at pushing content that is more likely to incentivize the user to continue using the social media service. Therefore, algorithms often promote posts based on users' past behavior and visited pages or accounts, information relevant to the users' physical location or specified interests, and other personalized considerations.
In addition to internal shaping mechanisms, social media content is increasingly defined by a range of external actors seeking to advance social and political beliefs, perceptions and ideologies. The presence of state-linked threat actors, extremist organizations and political groups on social media platforms has risen, and these collectives have become more adept at leveraging algorithmic preferences to ensure their content reaches targeted audiences. The rise of generative artificial intelligence tools has further contributed to the weaponization of the information landscape as malign actors become increasingly proficient at constructing synthetic audio and visual content that can convincingly falsify portrayals of individuals or events to shape users' perceptions of real-world occurrences in line with their narratives.
The pernicious implications of the complex online information environment have become increasingly pronounced. For instance, far-right riots erupted in the United Kingdom in early August after misinformation swirled around a fatal mass stabbing incident, wherein online users inaccurately claimed the perpetrator was an undocumented Muslim migrant. In addition to false claims spurred by everyday social media users, British authorities also suggested that foreign states had amplified disinformation. The role of mis- and disinformation has also been prevalent around U.S. election developments — namely, the two assassination attempts targeting Republican presidential nominee and former President Donald Trump — which have polarized the country, with some supporters of Trump claiming the attack was organized by the government and some opponents arguing the attempts were staged. These narratives, along with a variety of other false claims surrounding both political parties and candidates, have become more pronounced as the election draws closer, escalating citizens' fears of political violence around Election Day.
In an effort to combat the harmful byproducts of social media content, several Western governments have called on the largest and most influential technology conglomerates to bolster content moderation practices and improve the identification and removal of illicit content like hate and extremist speech. The European Union has been at the forefront of these initiatives, in line with its prominence as a global standard-bearer for digital rule-making around data privacy and emerging technologies. Although prominent anglophone countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom have also become more outspoken about the importance of digital regulation and have taken limited measures against leading social media companies, their jurisdictions have been comparatively much more hesitant to enforce regulations due to a general reluctance to increase government interference in the private sector and concerns around infringement on free speech.
Among the European Union's wide array of data privacy and digital safety initiatives, the Digital Services Act, or DSA, is the most recent, relevant piece of legislation addressing the issue of content moderation on social media platforms. Though the DSA officially came into effect in November 2022, the bloc only started fully enforcing the act in February 2024, requiring large online platforms to undertake an array of safety measures including risk assessments, removing illegal content like hate speech, and enforcing mitigation steps to limit the impact of generative AI, particularly around election cycles.
In the months since the DSA came into full enforcement, the European Union has moved quickly to wield it. In mid-February, the bloc announced an investigation into TikTok under accusations that the company had violated transparency requirements and obligations to protect minors and had employed algorithmic designs that contributed to behavioral addiction patterns. In late April, the European Commission announced an investigation into Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, under claims that the multinational company's moderation efforts are "insufficient" and fail to address the problem of disinformation. In early July, the commission announced preliminary charges against X for violating the DSA's transparency requirements. The European Commission is expected to announce possible fines associated with X's charges in the coming months, potentially as high as 6% of the company's annual revenue.
Individual EU countries have also taken more forceful steps through other legal means to prosecute social media representatives and their platforms. Most recently, French authorities on Aug. 24 arrested Pavel Durov, the creator and CEO of Telegram, arguably the world's most contentious social media platform known for its encrypted messaging capabilities that enable users (ranging from activists and political dissidents to extremists and criminals) to covertly communicate with little oversight from Telegram moderators or law enforcement officials. Authorities claim Durov allowed his platform to be used for child sex and drug trafficking and refused to comply with law enforcement investigations by providing information or documents for various criminal cases. Taken together, these bloc-wide and country-specific actions have set the European Union apart from the rest of the world, demarcating it as one of the most proactive jurisdictions in regulatory efforts to take up arms against the pervasive presence of malign activity on many platforms.
However, it does not appear that these efforts have accomplished their desired effect, nor is it clear whether they will compellingly address the problem of mis- and disinformation in the future. While the DSA is still relatively nascent in its enforcement and, as such, is difficult to evaluate comprehensively in terms of its long-term efficacy, there is little indication that technology companies' moderation practices have significantly changed within the bloc or diminished fake content on social media platforms. Part of the challenge has been the inherent nature of technological advancement, which far outpaces regulatory developments that often take years to craft. For example, the DSA was in progress for four years before its implementation, and in the interim, the release of the generative AI chatbot ChatGPT and its rapid influence spread across the digital domain.
The European Union's struggle to contain disinformation was on clear display during the EU parliamentary elections in early June, as various actors spread false information to exploit European citizens' grievances around social issues and the bloc's response to them, ranging from agricultural policies, climate change, migration and support for Ukraine's war effort against Russia. This disinformation helped boost the reach and popularity of far-right, anti-establishment parties across Europe; in the past year alone, far-right parties have gained ground in France, Germany, the Netherlands and, most recently, Austria.
The main question that arises from these trends is whether mis- and disinformation are the catalysts for the rise of anti-democratic and non-liberal groups or individuals, or whether they are a symptom of underlying social and political sentiments that content moderation practices alone cannot quell. Moreover, the recent rise and real-world effects of mis- and disinformation pose a second question of whether even the most robust content enforcement practices could fully prevent the sudden and viral spread of false content that accompanies socially traumatic events like the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fatal mass stabbing in the United Kingdom, particularly in their immediate aftermath.
Moving forward, European governments will likely continue to bolster their oversight and compliance requirements for social media companies, particularly if the role of disinformation continues to manifest in real-world contexts such as protests, riots, or other acts of political and social violence. However, these multiplying enforcement mechanisms may increasingly become a double-edged sword, wherein top-down pressure only exacerbates citizens' underlying grievances and leads to more hateful or false social media content. This issue was evident during the United Kingdom's recent riots, which resulted in the arrest of several individuals and, in turn, contributed to online narratives of state oppression and government attacks on free speech. As these trends appear poised to continue and Western jurisdictions increasingly seek to hold large technology companies accountable for online content, societal fractionalization and political polarization will only grow.
