Between Analogies and Metaphors: The Debate on Content Moderation on Social Networks

Abstract

The article is about content moderation, which is an essential activity, but little known and publicized of social networks, and which affects values, public goods and rights, such as freedom of expression and information, privacy or security. Its legal framework which comes from the last decade of 20th century, has made possible, with the granting of a general regime of broad immunity to intermediaries operating on the Internet the birth of social media and their development until reaching the dimension they now have. This framework is today subject to various initiatives for revision, both in the United States and in the European Union, which will probably come forward in short term. A debate on the subject has had an undeniable influence on the origin, formalization and discussion of these initiatives, nourished by the very diverse contributions and where the use of analogies and metaphors has been frequent to support different positions on the future of moderation and regulation of social networks. The article sets out these positions, which range from a radical skepticism about the reform options to the maintenance of an almost unshakable confidence in self-regulation of the companies, going through different alternatives of greater or less public intervention, which is precisely where the legislative initiatives in process are located. The conclusion is that this approach is correct, that the democratic state should not adopt an interventionist role in the management of social media, but to ensure, through the approval of legal norms adjusted to the technological and social...