The tech elite arrogates the public debate | …

From Paris

Social networks such as Twitter and Facebook have started the big cleanup of several of their accounts, starting withr that of the same and current President of the United States, Donald trump, plus 7,000 additional accounts affiliated with the pro-Trump far-right conspiratorial galaxy, including the Qanon group. After opening the doors to the lowest and the lowest of politics, networks now claim to want to prevent another violent episode like the invasion of Capitol Hill encouraged by Trump, and this before the imminent date of Joe Biden’s inauguration. According to Twitter, a new attack on the Capitol was scheduled for January 17.. Some approved of this measure, others saw it more as an act of censorship. In Europe, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the decision “problematic”. In France, the Minister of the Economy, Bruno Le Maire, questioned the fact that the basis for the suspension of accounts is not a legal regulatory framework, but that “the most shocking is that it is Twitter which has decided to close “. In sum, that the technological elite are the ones to do and to undo at will and when it suits them, without any reference to a national or international standard developed by States and their elected officials.

The practice of “I the Supreme” by global corporations in the United States is neither new nor will it change with this attack on democratic essence. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of France Insoumise (on the left), recalled that “Trump’s behavior cannot serve as a pretext for GAFA (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon) to take the power to control public debate”. This is exactly what happened with President Pinocchio and Twitter. On the other hand, Washington has long applied a kind of extraterritoriality. US law is used in relation to national law, regardless of the country in which you reside. The terms of use of Google, Facebook, Apple and even those of corporate franchises in the United States, refer to company law or headquarters legislation. In turn, the digital industry has so far benefited from the legal immunity offered by Article 230 of the Communication Decency Act. As much as Trump is a sinister Pinocchio and, thanks to his digital army, staged the first modern-era coup in a Western democracy, there is something cynical about these reactions. European regulations say little or nothing about protecting Internet users against the massive espionage to which they are subjected every millisecond of their lives. The fortunes of these companies come mainly from converting stolen data into capital. However, the debate has its place, it is a necessity and raises other questions: why would it be “problematic” to close the Twitter account of a president who prepared a coup d’état in three phases (denounce the fraud before the election, then claim that the election was stolen and, in the end, oil a civic insurgency) and not that of an Islamist narrative, of the far right or the far left? In France, the laws have led far-right figures like Hervé Ryssen and Alain Soral to see their YouTube and Facebook accounts suspended.

The European Union defends its methodology because it has for some time been developing a legal framework for these issues of digital freedom. There is, in fact, European legislation in the process of being approved. It’s the DSA, Digital Services Act, promoted by Thierry Breton, the European Commissioner for the Internal Market. The scope of the DSA applies only to countries of the European Union. Therefore, when Trump summoned his supporters to invade Capitol Hill, he did so by addressing his people, not Europe. In this case, the DSA would have been useless. It would have been very different when Trump called on the French to rise up against their president. It is Thierry Breton who best raised the crossroads. In an article published by the Politico portal, the European Commissioner wrote that the capture of the “Capitol is September 11 of social networks”. Breton adds the paradox that beats in this whole situation because, until now, social networks were looking elsewhere, as if Brexit, Trump and other digital barbarities were not their concern. In this regard, Breton notes that, when the Trump account is closed: “the platforms recognize their responsibility. They can no longer hide their responsibility from society by arguing that they only offer a hosting service ”. The European law on digital services is based on a principle and a series of rules: the principle is that what is illegal in the physical world is also illegal in the digital sphere. The rules set by the 27 EU countries consist in obliging the platforms to apply national laws, as well as European directives. They must therefore remove terrorist content, incitement to violence and any illegal content (child pornography, weapons, etc.).

Between January 2017 and January 2021, the US president sent 23,234 tweets. The platform allowed him to insult, attack, belittle his opponents, mock other presidents, utter racial slurs, support the violent right who revere him, anticipate official statements, rule over Internet, to broadcast a montage in which Trump hit a journalist wearing a CNN mask and even calling for an uprising against Emmanuel Macron. With the exception of the digital apostles, there was plenty of evidence to show that free speech is not being manipulated by “system media” or others, but by social platforms. All the bullshit the market admits goes in and out. The networks gave Trump the power to stage a coup, and as he walked away and blood flowed on Capitol Hill, they suddenly became Guardians of the Galaxy. Societies are shamefully vulnerable to the temptations and barbarities of digital spaces. Trump was not the presidential exception but the confirmation of the capacities of this monster with millions of heads which is developing without, until now, nobody been able to find an antidote.

It’s contradictory, but just as no one cared about the right to broadcast or prevent the spread of trash, Trump’s rights to his account were also not guaranteed. They are the masters of the world, without the farthest shadow of democratic control. The freedom button is found at the headquarters of Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other digital empires, not on the streets or in the assemblies. Last Saturday, Twitter deleted a post from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei saying it was unwise to trust US or UK vaccines against COVID-19. Trump’s insane and horrific episode shows us that before the worst, freedom is in private hands. It depends on three words and an acronym, which are the obligations to which the digital tentacles subject users: T & Cs, “General Conditions of Use”.}