Evaluation of legislative regulations in terms of impact


The consideration of turning to the operator of a platform and making him responsible for the care of the content submitted and published by the user is probably the simplest form of argumentation to counteract the controlled and targeted dissemination or distribution of critical content.

Criticism of purely legislative measures:

  • The validity of legislative action is limited to a regional scope.
  • Lack of accessibility/control of operators who are not in the focus of public attention.
  • A legislative measure sends a wrong signal to the decision-makers of a democratically organized society.

Simplifying the argument to transfer responsibility to the operator of a social media platform does not consider the causes that trigger a problematic situation or the factors that amplify the effect of the complicated situation. Furthermore, the effectiveness of a policy must be demonstrated, and the obligation to comply ensured through a continuous and seamless audit supported by technical measures. As a consequence of the previous argumentation, the Network Enforcement Act's feasibility must be evaluated as a measure that is far away from reality. In this context, unrealistic means that relevant issues that limit the effect and cause possible consequences were obviously not taken into account to any significant extent when considering or drafting the measure.