This commentary provides first reflections on the recently published proposal for a Digital Markets Act and its prohibition of discriminatory rankings.

To ban content that might possibly violate their own content policies, social media platforms use the term 'borderline‘. This means categorising content as potentially unwanted (e.g. harmful, inappropriate, etc) and sanctioning legitimate expressions of opinion - hence putting lawful speech in a twilight zone.

Some platforms become systemically relevant in a crisis, so we need regulation that takes this into account before and during the next crisis.

The European Commission recently released its first review of two years of application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). René Mahieu and Jef Ausloos do not agree with the largely positive self-assessment and explain their main points of contention by summarising their own submission to the Commission.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Recital 23 brought an obligation to all companies that receive, control or process personal data of European Union (EU) residents to comply with the minimal safeguards stated in European legislation.

Since Twitter labelled a tweet by Donald Trump as ‘potentially misleading’ and indicated that it was fact-checking the statement made, the US President signed an ‘Executive Order'. Amélie Heldt finds that far from being new, the situation illustrates how torn we are when it comes to intermediary immunity or rather liability.

At the Carnegie UK Trust, a charitable foundation based in Scotland and operating across the UK and Ireland, we have been working for more than 100 years to improve well-being for individuals, community and society.

As the Covid-19 pandemic expanded across the world, so did the debates on whether fighting this sanitary emergency would require the use of personal data, and on how that would impact pre-established data protection frameworks.