6 ms·
European Majority favours more social media regulation
- andsoitis 10mo ago> favors more tech regulation You mean "social media regulation". Not "tech regulation".
- nis0s 10mo agoI think they might also mean surveillance tech, like plate readers and facial recognition.
- amarant 10mo agoSocial media tech, and surveillance tech, but I repeat myself
- notahacker 10mo agoAnd "don't build Skynet[1] or LLM overlords that can overpower us through the sheer power of their intellect" [1]the UK calls its military satcomms network that, but we've always been different...
- fancyfredbot 10mo agoThe article contains the questions they asked. The questions are only asking about social media. Specifically whether social media is sufficiently regulated and whether political advertising should be allowed on social media. It does not mention surveillance, and it's not about tech in general. The title is misleading. (Edit: the OP kindly updated the title and it's no longer misleading)
- bilbo0s 10mo agoI'm almost positive a lot of HN Users don't read the studies they comment on. They probably don't even read the articles. Which, ironically, given the topic of this post, speaks to the kinds of pathologies we find out on social media these days.
- andersa 10mo agoThe comments are often more interesting than the original articles.
- nis0s 10mo agoAdmittedly, I skimmed through the article, but there’s an ongoing discussion around regulation of biometrics, other personal indicators, and privacy (not covered in this article).
- andsoitis 10mo ago> I think they might also mean surveillance tech, like plate readers and facial recognition. How should we square that with EU politicians pushing for MORE surveillance, not less? One of many examples: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/24/eu-digital-surveillance-child-protection https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/24/eu-dig...
- alphager 10mo agoNot just social media. Amazon misusing is monopoly powers is also smack in the middle of the target.
- snowpid 10mo agochanged it. Thanks.
- FridayoLeary 10mo ago[flagged]
- stronglikedan 10mo agoYeah, the EU isn't quite authoritarian enough for the UK anymore.
- EarlKing 10mo ago[flagged]
- lastdong 10mo agoFrom reading the page the study “examines public attitudes social media regulation and banning political advertising from social platforms.” The question: To what extent, if at all, would you support or oppose banning political adverts from being shown on social media platforms? They conclude with: Voters for far-right parties are frequently less likely to support banning of political advertising on social media … and less likely to think regulations are too lax … typically less likely to think social media regulations are too relaxed (with Italy being an exception).
- miroljub 10mo ago> They conclude with: Voters for far-right parties are frequently less likely to support banning of political advertising on social media Maybe the issue here is that many political options have social media and underground marketing as their only option due to heavy bias and censorship on European traditional media. Even the term used here "far right" is an euphemism for opinions not approved by governing European regimes.
- snowpid 10mo agoMaybe the "far right" is a good description. E.g. AfD. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_f%C3%BCr_Deutschland#Treffen_mit_Vertretern_rechtsextremer_und_identit%C3%A4rer_Bewegungen https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_f%C3%BCr_Deutschla...
- miroljub 10mo agoWhich of actual AfD policies are actually far right? EDIT: I am ignoring this link since its main source is Corrective, propaganda outlet funded by the German regime.
- gloryjulio 10mo agoWhitewashing nazi issues(not the casual nazi labels we have seen these days, but the actual Nazi Germany) would be considered far right
- i_love_retros 10mo ago[flagged]
- stronglikedan 10mo ago[flagged]
- snowpid 10mo agoso you are positive on the Trump administration?
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- gbanfalvi 10mo agoThe questions seem more focused around social media but I wish there were more safeguards to stop us (I’m talking as an EU citizen) from crashing and burning when the AI bubble pops.
- snowpid 10mo agoI've changed the title to be more precise (from tech regulation to social media regulation). It's important though, that attempts from foreign governmental entities (you might guess which country) might backfire if it's against popular policy decisions. I'm not sure if this foreign government is aware of it.
- vegabook 10mo agoNote how lots of slicing is provided on a bunch of dimensions except the one that really matters: age groups. Fully willing to bet 60+ is both more likely to answer these surveys and very pro-censorship. If we weighted this survey by remaining life expectancy I bet the results would be inverted.
- schmookeeg 10mo agoI assume people in government, at some level, are weighting constituent inputs by taxes paid. Which keeps it upright. :)
- Terr_ 10mo agoThere's absolutely weighing on money, but it's not from taxes. They'll be weighing constituents by their ability and willingness to give campaign donations and other favors.
- frm88 10mo agoThe article is about Europe. In Europe, parties are publicly funded and donations are strictly limited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_European_political_parties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_European_political_...
- snowpid 10mo agoInteresting, that you equal social media regulation = pro censorship. Btw every age group over 30 has a majority to imitate Australian model in Germany. Even lower 30 there is only a small relative majority against it. So no, your hypothesis for Germany is wrong. https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/social-media-verbot-deutsche-fordern-australien-modell-693c664172c5279acd482266 https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/social-media-verbot-deuts...
- carlosjobim 10mo agoIt's in the name. Any media regulation is some kind of censorship.
- ThinkBeat 10mo agoI think we should shut down the current crop of social media but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. I think an easier way to achieves instead of imposing this on everyone. Social media companies should be required to add paid tier where the individual user can block the types of the user does not want to see, (or just block all of them). In some places perhaps the government would ban "free social media" and only allow the paid tier to operate. This in the best case would make the price reasonably low, if the social media company does not want to lose a lot of users. Perhaps even subsidised. At which point the goal set above is achieved.
- phatfish 10mo agoIt should be regulated similar to online gambling in the UK (so barely, but it is a start). The key being age verification. Under 18, or maybe 16 accounts have: Mandatory blackout periods (after 9pm most account functions stop working, parents could set this more aggressively if they cared about the child's studies). Interaction limits like time spent on feeds, type of content that will appear in feeds, number of friends, visibility of comments ect. Only one account allowed and enforcement taken seriously. Over 16/18s should have the option to "time themselves out" for a chosen period with their account going into a limited mode where feeds no longer work . Similar to the option problem gamblers have where gambling sites are supposed to stop them playing if they block themselves. Maybe when someone needs to focus for exams or a work commitment. Sure kids will try and get round limits, but I think when you have investment in a main account it would be something you would want to keep, so the threat of loosing it would be real.
- JumpCrisscross 10mo ago> we should shut down the current crop of social media but that isn't going to happen anytime soon If you concede in your first sentence, obviously not. It’s happened in Australia. It’s building in America. And I think there are enough European countries
- nomendos 10mo ago[flagged]
- 4ndrewl 10mo agoYou need different slippery slopes as they're two different visions of a future (or rather past in Orwell's case)
- SiempreViernes 10mo agoWith the slop slope everywhere goes to the same thing, which is how the poster could write that comment: by thinking sloppily.
- EarlKing 10mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- snowpid 10mo agoIf you don't care, why do you comment? Recent actions show the US government cares. And it might be good to know how people would act on the actions. (Also check your assumption about other countries.)
- stavros 10mo agoOK?
- notrealyme123 10mo agoSocial media makes teens suicidal. The companies know, but burry it. People defend those companies on the internet.
- p2detar 10mo ago> as the European Union (and former EU states like the UK) are transparently run like banana republics whose barely-elected bureaucrats run them like their own little ramshackle empire for their personal enrichment Bold Statement. I wonder though, could you offer examples of places in the world today where it is being done otherwise?
- adamnemecek 10mo ago> run them like their own little ramshackle empire for their personal enrichment If you are from the US, I’m laughing my butt off, the irony is not lost on me.
- embedding-shape 10mo agoFor what it's worth, I'm European, and I disagree with the US on many things, but I'm not gonna dismiss all Americans' point of view because of that, regardless of how bad I think the country does things. Even the most horrible practices, can have small helpful ideas, that you can cherry-pick. But, no one is forcing you to do so, just like no one can really force us off the internet either.
- saubeidl 10mo ago[flagged]
- ascii0eks84 10mo ago[flagged]
- saubeidl 10mo agoThat is just straight up not true. https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boosting-the-british-right-13464445 https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boo...
- exceptione 10mo agoAny democracy should. Good lemma, seems to implement the more general principle of Paradox of Tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- baobun 10mo agoA good start would be government officials and institutions to stop relying on and promoting (on) them. Ministers in office shouldn't be using them to communicate with their constituents. Public service broadcasters shouldn't be publishing on them. Then it would be great of the population follows. But it is certainly not the role of government to decide what foreign communications services their citizens can access. Autoritarian censorship is not a democratic tool even if other apparently democratic countries are doing it.
- poisonborz 10mo agoTurn the sentence around with platforms like Reddit and see how ridiculous this sounds. Censorship will not defend democracy.
- saubeidl 10mo agoIt's not censorship to defend against cyberwarfare. An overly simplistic approach to free speech is naive and counterproductive in a modern environment. These aren't serious people having a reasonable discussion. They are propagandists on a psyop platform, design to sow discontent in our democratic structures.
- ascii0eks84 10mo agoI don't condone more regulation if it means decreasing the public's voice. Some things a society should endure in order to LEARN or GROW as a society or a person. There are things worth keeping out of that sphere but it's minimally relevant to this legal push. After all "far right" is not the issue, it's far left.
- grigio 10mo ago[flagged]
- Garlef 10mo agoMy pet idea (which I'm also reluctant to fully get behind): Participation in social media (including comments sections in newspapers, etc) only with verified identities but behind some sort of escrow (so that you're anonymous to the public and also the platform... until you break the law by threatening SA or similar). Why? Bots, trolls, etc are a huge problem and if only actual people could post, this would a bit harder for bad actors.
- morkalork 10mo agoThere are plenty of "easy money working from home" scams where the victim/patsy is a regular person duped into criminal activities like mail forwarding packages bought with stolen credit cards. I wonder if the same ecosystem would crop up around such an identity scheme.
- throwawa14223 10mo agoGood thing that "“The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.”.
- incze 10mo agomedia structures can be used as arms. most of the current media content is not "speech" (opinion, human talk, etc.) but targeted consumer or political product. both of them are regulated on their traditional platforms but not on new tech, and the big tech tries to avoid it, escaping behind the "free speech" lie.
- silexia 10mo agoThis is a poorly worded survey. Everyone wants bad things to happen to things they don't like. Government regulation is a bad thing, nothing government does has good outcomes. Usually government regulators get captured by someone and corrupted, or they just create a lot of inefficiency and headaches for everyone.