It is now a well-known evil. The work of the Fake Off section of 20 minutes can attest to this: in recent years, there is no longer a single current event – from Covid-19 to elections, including international or sports news – to be spared by disinformation and the massive dissemination of false news on social networks. As the 2022 presidential election approaches, the question is not whether it will be the target, but whether there are means to limit their spread. The President of the Republic must also install, this Wednesday, an independent commission “responsible for reflecting on the impacts of the digital revolution on our society and our democracy”, indicates the Elysee. Chaired by sociologist Gérald Bronner, it will notably formulate proposals on the fight against online hatred or disinformation, in particular during an election campaign.
This is not the first time that Emmanuel Macron has looked into the fight against fake news. In a context marked by suspicion of Russian interference in the 2016 American presidential election and after a campaign marked by false information in France the following year, the Head of State had a Parliament vote in 2018 to fight “Against the manipulation of information”. It will be implemented for the first time as part of a presidential election next April. For what efficiency? “A law which is added to a law, which is added to a law … It is difficult not to see an announcement effect”, immediately points out Alexandre Lazarègue, lawyer specializing in press and media law. digital.
“A law that is difficult to apply”
Three months before a national ballot, the text allows in particular any citizen to seize a judge who, in forty-eight hours, will rule on the need to stop the dissemination of false news likely to alter the “sincerity” of a ballot. Also during the campaign period, the law obliges digital platforms – in particular social networks – to set up a system for reporting false information. In addition, it grants new powers to the CSA, which can now suspend the broadcasting of a television channel which would be “placed under the influence” of a foreign state.
“This law has the double defect of endangering freedom of opinion and of being difficult to apply”, criticizes François-Bernard Huyghe, director of research at Iris. Because to suspend the dissemination of false news, the summary judge must note that this dissemination is “deliberate, artificial or automated and massive”. The alteration of the sincerity of the ballot must for its part be “manifest”. Clearly, the false news must have been spread by bots or via sponsored content and its effects on the ballot must be able to be proven. “In the end, the vast majority of disinformation on the Internet therefore does not fall within the scope of the law,” notes Alexandre Lazarègue. Especially since in forty-eight hours, a fake news has plenty of time to gain momentum. “
The question of sanctions
In the light of the polls organized since 2018 – in particular the European ones of 2019 – the LREM deputy Laetitia Avia draws up a mixed assessment of the text: “I have never seen anyone use this law. There is a cruel lack of jurisprudence. We have given powers of investigation, supervision and control, which was necessary, but the last mile is missing… the sanctions. However, to move the platforms and correct the systems, this sword of Damocles is necessary. “For the elected, the platforms do not play the game enough, considering that the texts are” imprecise “and” difficult to understand “. “Twitter has even gone so far as to censor a government communication campaign in response to our requests,” she said.
“It would be too easy to put all the blame on social media. While their model is obviously conducive to the propagation of fake news, many initiatives have been taken to limit their dissemination. Whether it is by working with fact-checking sections, or by deleting numerous accounts of disinformation ”, nuance François-Bernard Huyghe. Last August, the YouTube platform made people talk about it by deleting nearly a million videos relaying information deemed dangerous on Covid-19. And the researcher pointed out the limits of government policies to fight against false news: “Any denial from above is automatically denied within the complosphere, which is why we must prioritize initiatives from civil society. There can be nothing worse than a ‘Big Brother’ effect, ”he further points out.
At EU level, intense lobbying
An opinion shared by the Association of Community Internet Services (Asic), which brings together, in France, the main digital giants, from Google to Twitter via Facebook and Airbnb. “This French habit of legislating on everything and anything should not take precedence over media education,” reacts its president, Giuseppe de Martino. “It is by continuing to support the actions of social networks and information verification sections that we can move forward. By systematically raising the specter of sanctions, we run the risk that the platforms purely and simply remove the functions allowing an opinion to be expressed, which would be detrimental to everyone. “
In order to put in place a solid framework for the transparency of online platforms, the European Union presented, several months ago, new legislation on digital services: the “Digital Services Act”. This new legislation currently under negotiation should allow better transparency on social networks and a more effective fight against disinformation, in particular through sanctions. An initiative that does not please the lobby of social networks. According to a survey of organizations
Corporate Europe Observatory and Lobby Control, nearly 97 million euros would be spent each year by companies in the sector to influence the digital policy of the European Union.