Private Life, Freedom of Expression and the Role of Transnational Digital Platforms: A European Perspective

Transnational digital platforms have contributed greatly to freedom of expression, not least including easy access to information. However, they have also enhanced private life infringements such as the unconsented distribution of nudity, sexual activities and fake porn. We may look to the European...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. Verfasser: Schaumburg-Müller, Sten
Format: Buchkapitel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Transnational digital platforms have contributed greatly to freedom of expression, not least including easy access to information. However, they have also enhanced private life infringements such as the unconsented distribution of nudity, sexual activities and fake porn. We may look to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) which has dealt extensively with the balancing of freedom of expression and the protection of private life. The Court has developed a set of criteria to balance the rights; The criteria are not perfect, but they are workable, and they include criteria such as ‘contribution to a debate of general interest’ and ‘the methods involved’ when collecting and distributing information, including pictures. However, companies including transnational digital platforms, are not legally bound by international human rights law, only states are. To address this, the UN has developed United Nations Guiding Principles to Business and Human Rights. These Principles do not create legal obligations, but duties including the duty to address human rights adverse effects of their activities. So far, the transnational digital platforms have done little, if anything at all, to address private life infringements. As of late, Facebook has indeed established an Oversight Board and declared its commitments to the UN Guiding Principles. This is a step in the right direction but overtly insufficient, as it solely addresses infringements of freedom of expression, but not any other human rights infringement such as violation of private life.
ISSN:2662-7124
2662-7132
DOI:10.1007/16495_2022_40