This is bad news
https://gript.ie/digital-services-bill-passed-in-dail/
DIGITAL SERVICES BILL PASSED IN DÁIL
As we repeatedly point out, the Government and the main opposition parties agree on almost all matters which seriously impact on the lives of citizens.
(There are of course the optics and the personality conflicts that arise when they are squabbling about things that they support when they do them and oppose when the other crowd do them
The Digital Services Bill which may well have serious implications for the manner in which opinions are policed on social media platforms is one such example. As I wrote
previously, the Bill is simply the transposition of yet another EU Directive into Irish law. Regulation EU 2022/2065 seeks to tackle what is described as “misinformation.”
Although there were speakers who were critical of the Bill at Second Stage in December, very few amendments were tabled either at Committee stage and last night the Bill was passed after a “debate” that lasted around 20 minutes.
All of the opposition amendments were either withdrawn or defeated without a vote being called. Not one TD was present to oppose the Bill and it now goes to the Seanad.
The only opposition TD to table amendments last night was Sinn Féin’s Louise O’Reilly. Far from seeking to protect the expression of opinions, her main amendments were designed to ensure that, once in place, that the “trusted flaggers” would be ideologically reliable.
Under the legislation, organisations that wish to identify illegal online content can apply to qualify officially as “trusted flaggers”, who take on the role of identifying and notifying platforms of content on their site which could potentially be illegal.
Minister for State Dara Calleary merely pointed out that the legislation could not specify the categories sought by O’Reilly because the EU Regulation did not allow for any national parliament of a member state to change the decree. That, in itself, is an indication of where the sovereignty of the Irish state is at these days.
O’Reilly’s wished to ensure that persons or organisations entrusted with “vetted research” and as “trusted flaggers” would be “a recognised trade union” and a “Non-Governmental Organisation” – once an entity fitting such a description was found to have made an application “pursuant to a public service mission recognised by a Member State.”
We can see or vividly imagine the idea that lies behind this. It is quite obvious that many on the Left – which let us be honest is the descriptive that covers both of the categories referred to – would not only wish to be in a position to monitor and potentially restrict free expression on social media, but have done so and still do so in some circumstances.
The ongoing criticism of the owner of a certain social media platform is obviously linked to their having been in the past able to impose quite stringent controls on opinions that dissent from the left-liberal line. That line was conterminous with the interests and restrictions of many states during the Covid Panic, for example – and still aligns with the EU consensus on immigration.
What O’Reilly and those who came up with this notion want to do is to embed such controls not only in the culture and structures of the corporations which still deploy restrictions against certain categories of free speech, but within the legislation and structures and culture of the state.
Now, O’Reilly, her staff, and the NGO and union lobbyists who thought that this might be a good idea clearly do not do irony. For in her next amendment she referred to people she would prefer are specifically excluded from becoming involved in “vetted research” or accepted within the context of the Bill as a “trusted flagger.”
Her amendment proposed that “The Commission shall ensure that the status of trusted flagger is not awarded to an entity which is partisan and seeks the status as a trusted flagger as a means of controlling or influencing content.”
www.irishexaminer.com
freespeechireland.ie
newsrnd.com
