Publicité
Publicité

Contenu connexe

Présentations pour vous(20)

Similaire à Report on current policies and regulatory frameworks(20)

Publicité
Publicité

Report on current policies and regulatory frameworks

  1. COMPACT PROJECT Bringing Social Media and Traditional Media Together Deliverable: D2.1: Report on current policies and regulatory frameworks 1
  2. COMPACT H2020 Project • The information is prepared by the team of the COMPACT project (http://compact-media.eu/). • COMPACT is a Coordination and Support Action funded EuropeanCommission under framework Horizon 2020. • The objective of the COMPACT project is to increase awareness (including scientific, political, cultural, legal, economic and technical areas) of the latest technological discoveries among key stakeholders in the context of social media and convergence.The project will offer analyses and road maps of related initiatives. In addition, extensive research on policies and regulatory frameworks in media and content will be developed. 2
  3. Consortium 3
  4. Consortium Participant No * Participant organisation name Country 1 (Lead) National University of Ireland (NUI) Ireland 2 School of Communication and Media, n.o. (SCM) Slovakia 3 DATA d.o.o. (DAT) Slovenia 4 The European Digital SME Alliance (EDA) Belgium 5 Bulgarian Association of Software Companies (BAS) Bulgaria 6 Jožef Stefan Institute (JSI) Slovenia 7 Ontotext Corp (ONT) Bulgaria 8 NGO Agency of European Innovations (AEI) https://aei.org.ua/ Ukraine 9 Media 21 Foundation (M21) Bulgaria 10 UNIVERSIDADE CATOLICA PORTUGUESA (RCC) Portugal 11 Partnership for Social Development (PSD) Croatia 12 IT Forum (ITF) Denmark 13 The University of Latvia (UL) Latvia 14 Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELI) Greece 15 Mediaframe Ltd. (MF) UK
  5. Summary 5 The Report on current policies and regulatory frameworks for social media and content convergence: information disorder, human rights and regulatory implications (D2.1) provides a comprehensive insight into regulatory and governance initiatives addressing the human rights concerns related to information disorder in social media and a better understanding of the regulatory and governance implications, including their potential impact on fragmentation of the single market. One of the contributions of the project is a tool for assessing existing governance frameworks on the basis on an agreed set of requirements and with reference to existing standards, which was originally designed for the purpose of the research carried out in preparation of this report. The analysis was carried out in 11 EU Member States, and the methodology was piloted in 71 initiatives. The initiatives of the following countries were included in the study: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia and UK.
  6. Summary 6 This study presents and summarizes the most important findings and categorizes them by specific methodological criteria within the framework developed here. The structured summary of the key findings is complemented by recommendations addressing both the analysis criteria and the adequate stakeholders. All the work here is presented through the lens of the fundamental rights and the regulatory implications of the analysed issues. Important to note is that they are based on the current dataset collected in 11 EU Member States in the period of May-September 2018. Therefore, this is not the exhaustive set of recommendations to be produced by WP2 within the COMPACT project. The complete overview and rationale of the overall recommendations set will be provided in D2.3 Report, after the survey is extended to all current EU Member states (i.e. 28) and the governance initiatives related to information disorder available in all these countries are analysed.
  7. Summary 7 The study analysed a varied range of information governance initiatives covering different issues related to information disorder. The results show that most of the initiatives currently active are of a national type, indicating a serious lack of trans-border collaboration and impact. One important insight is that most of the activities are being performed by non-governmental or civil society actors, while there is a lack of initiatives involving the industry. In addition, digital rights advocacy and gender issues are largely unrepresented among the stakeholders, to an extent that there is a complete lack of this aspect within the initiatives’ activities. Despite the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches, the share of one-stakeholder initiatives is significantly high and are the most representative of the governance models currently existing in the examined countries. The lack of employing technology and the minimal technological and policy impact per se reveal an important space for improvements and innovation. Moreover, the lack of networking platforms for dissemination and collaboration purposes points to a clear direction to be taken for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the initiatives’ work.
  8. Summary 8 Spread in a multi-stakeholder community, this report will have two-fold contribution: on the one hand it will raise the awareness on the shared challenges and opportunities among the industry, users, policymakers and other important stakeholders; on the other hand, it will help stakeholder gain familiarity with the good practices in the field and the extent to which there is a unification of the regulatory approaches in the context of information disorder.
  9. CONTENTS 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION Purpose Scope Structure Target audience of the report THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT Social media and content convergence Information disorder EU framework initiatives Socio-economic implications Fundamental rights Regulation, governance and regulatory implications Statutory regulation Self-regulation Co-regulation Governance Transparency and Accountability METHODOLOGY Conceptual framework The Wardle-Derakhshan conceptual framework for information disorder General Systems Theory (GST) Principles Choice of Fundamental Rights EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK EU baseline The Combined Survey Tool Data gathering
  10. CONTENTS 10 GENERAL INFORMATION FOR CONTEXT ASSESSMENT Baseline Scope Type of information disorder Stakeholders Regulatory analysis Empirical analysis Scope Type of information disorder Stakeholders Regulatory analysis CONCEPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION Baseline Openness Objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Conflict resolution mechanisms Financing scheme Technology exploitation Challenges Empirical analysis Openness Objectives Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) Conflict resolution mechanisms (CRMs) Financing scheme Technology exploitation Challenges
  11. CONTENTS 11 RESULTS AND EVALUATION Baseline Impact Dedicated methods for raising awareness Evaluation Empirical analysis Impact Dedicated methods for raising public awareness Evaluation ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLAINT RESOLUTION Baseline Sanctions Complaints resolution Remedy and redress Empirical analysis Sanctions Complaints resolution Remedy and redress STATUTORY SUPPORT Baseline Empirical analysis Formal recognition of the initiatives’ self- and co-regulatory practices Incentives for participation in the scheme Supervision of the implementation The State as a financer
  12. CONTENTS 12 KEY FINDINGS Context assessment Conception and Implementation Results and evaluation Enforcement and complaint resolution Statutory support RECOMMENDATIONS Context assessment Conception and Implementation Results and evaluation Enforcement and complaint resolution Statutory support Industry stakeholders Institutional stakeholders Non-governmental stakeholders DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES APPENDIX Table X. Baseline for regulatory landscape analysis at EU Level List of the processed initiatives (by country)
  13. FULL DOCUMENT 13 Available on the COMPACT project website. At the link: http://compact-media.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/D2.1- Report-on-current-policies-and-regulatory-frameworks.pdf
Publicité