Skip to main content
Book cover

YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions 2021 pp 145–174Cite as

The Freedom of speech in the Digital Era: Leveraging Its Constitutional and Social Ramifications

  • 118 Accesses

Part of the YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions book series (YSEC,volume 2021)

Abstract

Freedom of speech in the digital era comes with a number of open issues, including the role of regulation, of the markets as well as that of the public sphere. In many of the related issues, tensions of constitutional and social nature resurface. This is also the case with some of the recently introduced EU policy initiatives and legal rules to digital speech. While they seem to give ground to EU wide rules on some important issues, their reach can remain limited without a constitutional and social understanding of the matters at hand. Thus, it appears in many ways beneficial to have a wider outlook and analysis of these topics, including the constitutional and social ramifications of regulating freedom of expression today. This article sets an example to that and joins these threads together in its analysis. By doing so, the work aims to contribute towards obtaining a wider outlook into an evolving domain which has global implications.

The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/16495_2021_36
  • Chapter length: 30 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-031-08514-7
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rosendahl (2007), p. 5.

  2. 2.

    Hutchison (1999), p. 63.

  3. 3.

    Bell (2016).

  4. 4.

    Jenkins (1992), and Jenkins (2008), p. 16.

  5. 5.

    Suthersanen (2001), p. 92.

  6. 6.

    Livingstone (2003). pp. 4–7.

  7. 7.

    Balkin (2004). p. 2.

  8. 8.

    Hutchison (1999), p. 50.

  9. 9.

    Draft Report on media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union (2017/2209(INI)) Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Rapporteur: Barbara Spinelli, 2017/2209, at E.

  10. 10.

    Paukku (2006a), p. 48.

  11. 11.

    Hutchison (1999), p. 62.

  12. 12.

    See also Pihlajarinne (2012), p. 12 referring to C 324/09 Loreal SA etc. v. Ebay.

  13. 13.

    At https://www.ibpa-online.org/page/hybridpublisher.

  14. 14.

    See Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, European Data Protection Supervisor, and European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2018) Handbook of European Data Protection Law, p. 361, referring to WP29 opinion 5/2009 on online social networking WP163, 12 June 2009, p. 4.

  15. 15.

    Saarenpää (1995), p. 588.

  16. 16.

    Hirshman and Holbrook (1992), p. 25.

  17. 17.

    CoE (2018), p. 43.

  18. 18.

    Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)2 on the roles and responsibilities of internet intermediaries.

  19. 19.

    Draft Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the Roles and Responsibilities of Internet Intermediaries, finalized by the MSI-NET on 19 September 2017.

  20. 20.

    See Shaw (2003), pp. 694 and 704.

  21. 21.

    European Commission (2018) A multi-dimensional approach to disinformation. Report of the independent High-level Group on fake news and online disinformation; March, p. 16.

  22. 22.

    Ananny (2015), pp. 13–14.

  23. 23.

    OSCE 2012, p. 199.

  24. 24.

    At http://www.circleid.com/posts/20171016_civil_society_call_for_deletion_of_eu_internet_filtering_provision/.

  25. 25.

    Hardt (2001), p. 155.

  26. 26.

    Mujić et al. (2012), p. 38.

  27. 27.

    Pallero and Pirkova (2020), p. 30.

  28. 28.

    European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6.

  29. 29.

    See: OSCE Report 2012 “Freedom of Expression on the Internet.”

  30. 30.

    Media pluralism and democracy: Outcomes of the 2016 Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights, pp. 3–7.

  31. 31.

    At https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/public-consultations-media-issues Last accessed on January 10, 2021.

  32. 32.

    Case C-288/89 Stichting Collectieve Antennevoorziening Gouda and others v Commissariaat voor de Media. ECR 1991 Page I-04007, para. 23–25.

  33. 33.

    Report on concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union (2007/2253(INI)), at Q.

  34. 34.

    Vīķe-Freiberga et al. (2013), p. 7.

  35. 35.

    See rather similarly Hyttinen and Tapani (2018), p. 61.

  36. 36.

    See Case C-288/89 Stichting Collectieve Antennevoorziening Gouda and others v Commissariaat voor de Media. ECR 1991 I-04007, para. 23. and case C-23/93 TV10 SA v Commissariaat voor de Media. ECR 1994 I-04795, para. 23 and 25. See also Paukku (2006a), p. 59.

  37. 37.

    Paukku (2006b), p. 118.

  38. 38.

    Curran (1991), pp. 47–52.

  39. 39.

    Pickard (2017) The Big Picture: Misinformation Society 11.28.2017 at http://www.publicbooks.org/the-big-picture-misinformation-society/.

  40. 40.

    Anderson (2005), in particular pp. 113–115.

  41. 41.

    Mylly (2009), p. 192.

  42. 42.

    Mylly (2009), p. 170.

  43. 43.

    Belshaw (1976), p. 321.

  44. 44.

    See the Zimbabwe Supreme Court in re: Munhumeso 1995 (2) BCLR 125 (ZS) 130.

  45. 45.

    Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021.

  46. 46.

    Mylly (2009), p. 154.

  47. 47.

    Mylly (2009), pp. 168–169, referring to case C-368/95 Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags- und vertriebs GmbH v Heinrich Bauer Verlag [1997] ECR I-3689.

  48. 48.

    Mylly (2009), p. 52.

  49. 49.

    Siebert et al. (1956).

  50. 50.

    Neuvonen (2014), pp. 20–21.

  51. 51.

    Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) adopted by UN GA Resolution 2200A (XXI) on 16 December 1966, and in force from 23 March 1976 in accordance with Article 49 of the covenant, The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), the Declaration on Fundamental Principles concerning the Contribution of the Mass Media to Strengthening Peace and International Understanding, to the Promotion of Human Rights and to Countering Racialism, apartheid and incitement to war 28 November 1978, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the Charter for European Security.

  52. 52.

    Case of Handyside v. the United Kingdom (7 December 1976), para. 49, case of Zana v. Turkey (25 November 1997), para. 32 and case of Axel Springer v. Germany (7 February 2012), para. 78, and Mylly (2009), p. 185.

  53. 53.

    Eek (1953), p. 12.

  54. 54.

    Eek, p. 77.

  55. 55.

    Eek, pp. 41, 57 and 133.

  56. 56.

    Eek, pp. 28–29.

  57. 57.

    Eek, p. 51.

  58. 58.

    German Federal Criminal Code, § 185. and § 130(1).

  59. 59.

    At https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/Dokumente/NetzDG_engl.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2.

  60. 60.

    Guggenberg N (2018) How not to regulate social networks WWU Münster Newsportal March 14, 2018 at https://www.uni-muenster.de/news/view.php?cmdid=9436.

  61. 61.

    Daten Ethik Kommission (2019), p. 208.

  62. 62.

    Loi organique et loi ordinaire du 22 décembre 2018 relatives à la manipulation de l'information.

  63. 63.

    Neuman S (2018) France’s Macron Says He Wants Law To Combat Fake News. January 4, 2018 at https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/04/575580790/frances-macron-says-he-wants-law-to-combat-fake-news?t=1611048976370.

  64. 64.

    Garcon (1963), p. 111.

  65. 65.

    Paukku (2006b), p. 116.

  66. 66.

    Case of Heinisch v. Germany (21 July 2011), para. 44. See also case of K.U. v. Finland (12 December 2008).

  67. 67.

    See e.g. Ipsen (1954), pp. 111-198, at 143 and van Dijk and van Hoof (1990), p. 413 and pp. 15–20.

  68. 68.

    Lüth, BVerfGE 7, 198 (15 January 1958).

  69. 69.

    Hoikka (2006), pp. 146–149.

  70. 70.

    Hoikka (2006), p. 153.

  71. 71.

    Paukku (2006a), p. 59.

  72. 72.

    Paukku (2006a), p. 66.

  73. 73.

    Paukku (2006b), p. 130, referring to case Informationsverein Lentia and Others v. Austria 24.11.1993 A276.

  74. 74.

    As of January 2021.

  75. 75.

    C 368/95 Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags- und vertriebs GmbH v Heinrich Bauer Verlag, para. 26. Cf. Raitio (2009), p. 314.

  76. 76.

    Case of the Sunday Times v. The United Kingdom (26 April 1979), para. 65, case of Müller v. Switzerland (24 May 1988), and case of Sokolowski v. Poland (17 December 2004).

  77. 77.

    Case C-112/00 Schmidberger, para. 80.

  78. 78.

    Case of Handyside v. UK (7 December 1976), para. 49, and case of Castells v. Spain (23 April 1992), para 42. Note also case of Lingens v. Austria (8 July 1986), para. 41, and case of Vogt v. Germany (26 September 1995), para 52.

  79. 79.

    Case C-112/00 Schmidberger, para. 81.

  80. 80.

    See, e.g., case of Groppera Radio AG and others v Switzerland (28 March 1990) and case of Lentia Tele 1 Privatfernsehengesellschaft v. Austria (24 November 1993).

  81. 81.

    Tiilikka (2012), p. 59.

  82. 82.

    Hyttinen and Tapani (2018), p. 48.

  83. 83.

    Case C-260/89 Elliniki Radiophonia Tiléorassi AE and Panellinia Omospondia Syllogon Prossopikou v Dimotiki Etairia Pliroforissis and Sotirios Kouvelas and Nicolaos Avdellas and others. ECR 1991 I-02925, para. 45.

  84. 84.

    Chalmers et al. (2006), pp. 833–834.

  85. 85.

    See case of Radio ABC v. Austria (20 October 1997) and Demuth v. Switzerland (5 November 2008).

  86. 86.

    Pere (2015), p. 63.

  87. 87.

    Neuvonen (2014), p. 25.

  88. 88.

    See case 29/69 Erich Stauder v City of Ulm - Sozialamt, case 11/70 Internationale Handelsgesellschaft mbH v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel. ECR 1970 Page 01125, para. 2. and from literature, e.g., Neuvonen (2014), p. 23.

  89. 89.

    See van Dijk and van Hoof (1990), p. 90.

  90. 90.

    Schmauch (2014) at https://svjt.se/svjt/2014/520 at p. 523.

  91. 91.

    Schmauch, p. 528.

  92. 92.

    Brückmann (2008), p. 165.

  93. 93.

    See Stirn (2008), p. 18.

  94. 94.

    See case Lüth BVerfGE 7, 198, 15 January 1958.

  95. 95.

    Brückmann, pp. 182 and 185.

  96. 96.

    Neuvonen (2014), p. 26. See, e.g., Joined cases 60 and 61/84 Cinéthèque SA and others v Fédération nationale des cinémas français. ECR 1985 -02605.

  97. 97.

    Weatherill (2006), p. 41, looking also at Opinion of Advocate General in Case C-376/98, para. 4, 89 and 133.

  98. 98.

    BVerfGE 37, 271 2 BvL 52/71 Solange I-Beschluß.

  99. 99.

    Ojanen (1998), p. 104.

  100. 100.

    Besson (2008), p. 63.

  101. 101.

    Case C-493/17 Proceedings brought by Heinrich Weiss and Others. Published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports—general).

  102. 102.

    See also case C-399/09 Marie Landtová v Česká správa socialního zabezpečení. Reports of Cases 2011 I-05573 and Case C-441/14 Dansk Industri (DI). Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general).

  103. 103.

    General Secretariat of the Council (2017) Taking forward the Strategic Agenda 18-month Programme of the Council (1 July 2017–31 December 2018), p. 8.

  104. 104.

    European Commission (2017b) White Paper on the Future of Europe: Reflections and Scenarios for the EU27 by 2025, p. 13.

  105. 105.

    Hearing of Commissioner-designate Věra Jourová at the European Parliament 7 October 2019 (AFCO- and LIBE- committees).

  106. 106.

    ECRI General Policy Recommendation N°15 on Combating Hate Speech - adopted on 8 December 2015.

  107. 107.

    Pallero and Pirkova (2020), p. 18.

  108. 108.

    Neuvonen (2012), p. 188.

  109. 109.

    Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act) Brussels, 15.12.2020 COM(2020) 842 final 2020/0374 (COD). See Article 2 for a definition of “Core platform service.”

  110. 110.

    Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC Brussels, 15.12.2020 COM(2020) 825 final 2020/0361 (COD).

  111. 111.

    Proposal COM(2020) 842 final, p. 4 and recital 8.

  112. 112.

    Proposal COM(2020) 842 final, Article 1.

  113. 113.

    Proposal COM(2020) 825 final, p. 12.

  114. 114.

    Proposal COM(2020) 825 final, para. 57.

  115. 115.

    Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (“Directive on electronic commerce”) OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, pp. 1–16.

  116. 116.

    Pihlajarinne (2012), p. 20.

  117. 117.

    Case C 70/10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM), 2011 I-11959, para 52.

  118. 118.

    See Cornils (1999), p. 713.

  119. 119.

    Hyttinen and Tapani (2018), p. 57.

  120. 120.

    Paukku (2007), p. 130.

  121. 121.

    Vīķe-Freiberga et al. (2013), p. 4.

  122. 122.

    COM(2020) 825 final, para. 44 and Article 18.

  123. 123.

    COM(2020) 825 final, recitals 73–74, and chapter IV of the act.

  124. 124.

    Mujić et al. (2012), p. 30 and p. 199.

  125. 125.

    Nuotio (2010), p. 15.

  126. 126.

    Mutanen (2015), p. 95.

  127. 127.

    Mäenpää (1996), p. 62 and the references therein.

  128. 128.

    Rasmussen (2007), pp. 149–156.

  129. 129.

    Salminen (2010), p. 157.

  130. 130.

    Case 106/77 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA. ECR 1978 -00629, see in particular para. 21 and 22.

  131. 131.

    Case 11/70 Internationale Handelsgesellschaft mbH v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel.

  132. 132.

    Tiilikainen et al. (2005), p. 81.

  133. 133.

    See, e.g., Eurobarometers 64/2005 and 251/2006. And Nieminen (2008), p. 17.

  134. 134.

    Bischof et al. (2002), p. 19.

  135. 135.

    Stirn (2008), p. 41.

  136. 136.

    Mäenpää (1996), p. 62.

  137. 137.

    Postigo (2013), p. 45.

  138. 138.

    See, e.g., Salminen, p. 161, referring to matters of criminal justice.

  139. 139.

    Tuori (2013), pp. 24–26.

  140. 140.

    Tuori (2013), p. 29, referring to Teubner (2004a), pp. 71–87, and Teubner (2004b), pp. 3–28.

  141. 141.

    Engström (2011), p. 21.

  142. 142.

    Vīķe-Freiberga et al. (2013), p. 20, referring to TEU Article 10.

  143. 143.

    Mutanen (2015), p. 64 referring to Weatherill (2011), pp. 850–851.

  144. 144.

    See Enhanced cooperation - Summaries of EU legislation at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Axy0015.

  145. 145.

    See Mutanen (2015), pp. 65–66.

  146. 146.

    Engström (2011), p. 25.

  147. 147.

    Engström (2011), pp. 13–14, referring to, inter alia, Walker (2009), p. 162, and Weiler (1999), pp. 226–234.

  148. 148.

    Engström (2011), pp. 21–22.

  149. 149.

    Engström 2011, p. 32.

  150. 150.

    Dahlgren (1991), p. 2.

  151. 151.

    Habermas (1997), p. 176.

  152. 152.

    Habermas (1997), p. 194.

  153. 153.

    Habermas J (1962) Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit.

  154. 154.

    Eriksen och Molander (red./eds.) (1997), pp. 133–134.

  155. 155.

    Susen (2011), p. 44, referring to Calhoun (1992), pp 1–48.

  156. 156.

    Balkin (2004), p. 46. See also Dahlgren (1991), p. 3.

  157. 157.

    Habermas (2011), pp. 59–61.

  158. 158.

    Schwartz and Peifer (2017), p. 146.

  159. 159.

    Svallhammar (1995), p. 9.

  160. 160.

    Svallhammar (1995), p. 146.

  161. 161.

    Eriksen och Molander (red.) (1997) Jürgen Habermas Diskurs, rätt och demokrati. Daidalos, p. 136.

  162. 162.

    Mörä (2008), p. 97.

  163. 163.

    Mylly (2009), p. 186.

  164. 164.

    Dahlgren (1991), p. 14.

  165. 165.

    Dahlgren (1991), p. 1.

  166. 166.

    Crigler and Jensen (1991), p. 191.

  167. 167.

    Lironi (2018), p. 3.

  168. 168.

    See, e.g., https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say.

  169. 169.

    de Zayas (2018), p. 46.

  170. 170.

    Volkmer (2015)

  171. 171.

    Mörä (2008), p. 93.

  172. 172.

    Foxman and Wolf (2013).

  173. 173.

    Kaakinen (2018), p. 28.

  174. 174.

    Kaakinen, p. 30 and Rains et al. (2017), pp. 163–178.

  175. 175.

    Jyränki (2003), p. 73.

  176. 176.

    Belshaw (1976), p. 163.

  177. 177.

    Habermas (1986).

  178. 178.

    Sundeep (1997), pp. 229–260.

  179. 179.

    Baym (2010).

  180. 180.

    Boyd (2014).

  181. 181.

    Marwick and Boyd (2010), pp. 114–33.

  182. 182.

    Gerbner (1967), p. 50.

  183. 183.

    See, e.g., Carlsson and Weibull (2018), p. 22 And Matikainen and Villi (2013), see, e.g., pp. 32 and 40.

  184. 184.

    Nyyssönen (2006), p. 107.

  185. 185.

    Case Lingens v. Austria, (8 July 1986), para 41, case Oberschlick v Austria (23 May 1991) para 58, case of Observer and Guardian v. the UK (26 November 1991) at 59b and case of Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary (8 November 2016), para. 168. See also Thorgeirsdottir (2003).

  186. 186.

    European Commission (2017a) Special Europbarometer 461: Designing Europe’s future: Trust in institutions. Globalisation. Support for the euro, opinions about free trade and solidarity Report, p. 14.

  187. 187.

    Présidentielles 2017: des élections sous influence? At http://www.informatiquenews.fr/presidentielles-2017-elections-influence-51385.

  188. 188.

    Koskimaa (2001), p. 93.

  189. 189.

    See, e.g., Nordicom (2012) Medietrender i Norden 2012. Nordicom.

  190. 190.

    At http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instruments/FLASH/surveyKy/2163 , p. 5.

  191. 191.

    Vos et Monnet (2018), pp. 20–22.

  192. 192.

    Bayer and Shotter (1998). Also Shotter (1993).

  193. 193.

    Cf. Paasilehto (1999), p. 103.

  194. 194.

    Cotterrell (1998), especially p. 188, fn. 58, citing Professor Hubert Rottleuhner.

  195. 195.

    Säntti and Säntti (2008), p. 14.

  196. 196.

    Säntti and Säntti (2008), p. 19.

  197. 197.

    Riker (1976), pp. 13–15.

  198. 198.

    See Poiares Maduro (2003), pp. 74–102. And Tuori and Sankari (2010).

  199. 199.

    Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, Article IV-443.

  200. 200.

    Tiilikainen et al. (2005), pp. 16–17.

  201. 201.

    Nuotio (2010), p. 19.

  202. 202.

    UNESCO Building Knowledge Societies At https://en.unesco.org/themes/building-knowledge-societies.

  203. 203.

    Mattelart et Stourdze (1985), p. 23.

  204. 204.

    Berman (1983), p. 53.

  205. 205.

    European Commission (2001) White Paper: A European Governance. Brussels, 25.7.2001 COM(2001) 428 final.

  206. 206.

    Balkin (2004), pp. 33–38.

  207. 207.

    Christodoulidis (2008), p. 78.

  208. 208.

    Schulz (2011), p. 247.

  209. 209.

    Neuvonen (2014), p. 30.

  210. 210.

    See also the German Constitution, Article 38.

  211. 211.

    Anderson (2012), p. 1009.

  212. 212.

    Franck (1992), p. 50.

  213. 213.

    Kessler (2012), p. 83, referring to Luhmann (1997), p. 670.

  214. 214.

    Kessler (2012), p. 85.

  215. 215.

    Buchanan and Pahuja (2008), pp. 261, 271.

  216. 216.

    Domingo (2012), p. 567.

  217. 217.

    From public international law, see, e.g., case Clerget Cour d’appel de Paris, 5 novembre 1969.

  218. 218.

    Stahn (2001), p. 549.

  219. 219.

    Eriksson (1992), p. 188.

  220. 220.

    Brown and Duguid (2000), p. 16.

  221. 221.

    Brown and Duguid (2000), pp. 49–52.

  222. 222.

    Norros (1996), p. 159.

  223. 223.

    Berman (2005), p. 485, 516.

  224. 224.

    Kapulainen and Rudanko (2012), p. 180.

  225. 225.

    See, e.g., Banakar and Travers (2013), p. 313.

  226. 226.

    See Sassi (2008), pp. 71–90.

  227. 227.

    Mörä (2008), pp. 91–114.

  228. 228.

    Kumpula (2006), p. 105.

  229. 229.

    Council of Europe (2018) State of democracy human rights and the rule of law role of institutions threats to institutions 2018 Annual report from the Secretary General p. 29.

  230. 230.

    See Berggruen Institute (2020), p. 18.

References

  • Ananny M (2015) Toward an ethics of algorithms: convening, observation, probability, and timeliness. Sci Technol Human Values:1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson CW (2012) Towards a sociology of computational and algorithmic journalism. New Media Soc 15(7):1005–1021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812465137

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson G (2005) Constitutional rights after globalisation. Hart Publishing, Great Britain

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkin JM (2004) Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society. Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 240

    Google Scholar 

  • Banakar R, Travers M (2013) Law and social theory, 2nd edn. Hart Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer BM, Shotter J (eds) (1998) Inquiries in social construction: reconstructing the psychological subject: bodies, practices and technologies. SAGE Publications Ltd, London. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857026019

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Baym NK (2010) Personal connections in the digital age. Polity, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell E (2016) Facebook is eating the world. Columbia Journalism Review. March 7, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Belshaw CS (1976) The Sorcerer’s apprentice an anthropology of public policy. Pergamon Press Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman HJ (1983) Law and revolution: the formation of the western legal tradition. Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman PS (2005) From international law to law and globalization. Colum J Transnatl Law 43:485

    Google Scholar 

  • Besson S (2008) How International is the European Legal Order? Retracing Tuori’s Steps in the Exploration of European Legal Pluralism. No Foundations 5 for Kaarlo Tuori

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof G, Pelinka A, Gehler M (2002) Austria in the European Union. Contemporary Austrian Studies Volume 10. Transaction Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd D (2014) It’s complicated: the social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press, New Haven. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2584525

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS, Duguid P (2000) The social life of information. Harvard Business School Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Brückmann R (2008) Kindergarten? The Interaction between the German Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights. Finnish yearbook of international law, vol XVII 2006. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan R, Pahuja S (2008) Law, nation and (imagined) international communities. In: Krisnaswamy R, Hawley JC (eds) The Postcolonial and the Global Minnesota 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson U, Weibull L (eds) (2018) Freedom of expression in the digital media culture a study of public opinion in Sweden. Nordicom

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers D, Hadjiemmanuil C, Monti C, Tomkins A (2006) European Union law. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Christodoulidis E (2008) European constitutionalism: The improbability of self-determination. No Foundations 5 for Kaarlo Tuori

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornils K (1999) Internetissä tehtyjen rikosten paikallistaminen. Lakimies 5/1999

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotterrell R (1998) Why must legal ideas be interpreted sociologically? J Law Soc 25(2) June

    Google Scholar 

  • Crigler AN, Jensen KB (1991) Discourses on politics: talking about public issues in the United States and Denmark. In: Dahlgren P, Sparks C (eds) Communication and citizenship – journalism and the public sphere. Routledge, reprint 1997

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran J (1991) Rethinking the media as a public sphere. In: Dahlgren P, Sparks C (eds) Communication and citizenship – Journalism and the public sphere. Routledge, reprint 1997

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren P (1991) Introduction. In: Dahlgren P, Sparks C (eds) Communication and citizenship – journalism and the public sphere. Routledge, reprint 1997

    Google Scholar 

  • de Zayas A (2018) Fake News, Fake history, Fake law. UN Special Magazine. Juin

    Google Scholar 

  • Domingo R (2012) The new global human community. Chicago J Int Law 12(2):567

    Google Scholar 

  • Eek H (1953) Freedom of Information as a project of international legislation A-B Lundequistska Bokhandeln, Uppsala

    Google Scholar 

  • Engström V (2011) International organizations, constitutionalism, and reform. In: Klabbers J (ed) Finnish yearbook of international law. Hart, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen EO och Molander A (red.) (1997) Jürgen Habermas Diskurs, rätt och demokrati. Daidalos

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson LE (1992) Kritik, Moral och Rätt, Offentligrättsliga institutionen. Helsingfors universitet

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck TM (1992) The emerging right to democratic governance. Am J Int Law 86(1):50

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Garcon M (1963) L’avocat et la Morale. Buchet/Chastel

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbner G (1967) Mass media and human communication theory. In: Dance FEX (ed) Human communication theory Holt. Rinehart & Winston

    Google Scholar 

  • Guggenberg N (2018) How not to regulate social networks WWU Münster Newsportal March 14, 2018 at https://www.uni-muenster.de/news/view.php?cmdid=9436. Last accessed on November 19, 2020

  • Habermas J (1986) Legitimation crisis (trans: McCarthy T). Heinemann, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1997) Facts and norms contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Polity Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (2011) Zur Verfassung Europas 66 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardt H (2001) Social theories of the Press: constituents of Communication Research, 1840s to 1920s, 2nd edn. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (Critical Media Studies: Institutions, Politics, and Culture)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshman EC, Holbrook MB (1992) Postmodern consumer research the study of consumption as text. Sage Publications

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hoikka M (2006) Viestinnän moniarvoisuus eurooppalaisena oikeusperiaatteena. In Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2005 Kuka valvoo vapautta Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja. Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison D (1999) Media policy an introduction. Blackwell Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyttinen T, Tapani J (2018) Rikoksen ja rangaistuksen äärellä. Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipsen HP (1954) Gleichheit. In: Neumann FL, Nipperdey HC, Scheuner U (eds) Die Grundrechte: Handbuch der Theorie und Praxis der Grundrechte. Band 2: Die Freiheitsrechte in Deutschland. Berlin, pp 111–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins H (1992) Textual poachers: television fans & participatory culture. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins H (2008) Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. Revised edn. New York University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jyränki A (2003) Valta ja Vapaus valtiosääntöoikeuden yleisiä kysymyksiä. Kolmas laajennettu laitos. Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaakinen M (2018) Disconnected online: a social psychological examination of online hate. Dissertation, University of Tampere, Tampere

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapulainen P, Rudanko M (2012) Kriittinen diskurssianalyysi lainsäädännön tutkimuksessa. Business Law Forum, Lakimiesliiton kustannus

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessler O (2012) World society, social differentiation and time. Int Stud Q 6(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskimaa R (2001) Kotikirjastojen uudet vaatteet. In: Jussila R, Kalalahti A, Rautoja S (toim./eds) Tieto ja kirja. Suomen tietokirjailijat ry 2001

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumpula A (2006) Kun oikeustiede ei riitä: Ympäristötiedon rakentuminen ja ympäristöoikeus. In Niemi-Kiesiläinen J et al (eds) Oikeuden tekstit diskursseina. Suomalaisen lakimiesyhdistyksen julkaisuja E-sarja no 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Lironi E (2018): Harnessing digital tools to revitalize European democracy Carnegie Europe, November 2018 at https://carnegieeurope.eu/2018/11/28/harnessing-digital-tools-to-revitalize-european-democracy-pub-77806

  • Livingstone S (2003) The changing nature of audiences: from the mass audience to the interactive media user. In: Valdivia A (ed) Companion to media studies. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/417/

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäenpää O (1996) Eurooppalainen hallinto-oikeus – Lähtökohtia ja perusteita. Lakimiesliiton kustannus, KATTI 26, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Marwick AE, Boyd D (2010) I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet passionately: Twitter users, context Collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media Soc 13(1):114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Matikainen J, Villi M (2013) Mobiilit mediasisällöt Sisältöjen tuottaminen, jakelu ja kulutus sosiaalisessa mediassa. Viestinnän tutkimuskeskus CRC, Sosiaalitieteiden laitos, Helsingin yliopisto

    Google Scholar 

  • Mörä T (2008) Julkisuuden ihanteet ja journalismin arki: Brysselin -kirjeenvaihtajat EU-koneiston ja kansalaisten välissä. In: Karppinen K, Nieminen H, Mörä T (toim./eds.) (2008) Onko Eurooppa olemassa? Näkökulmia Eurooppalaiseen julkisuuteen ja demokratiaan. Gaudeamus, Helsinki University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Mujić Z, Yazici D, Stone M (eds) (2012) Freedom of Expression on the Internet A study of legal provisions and practices related to freedom of expression, the free flow of information and media pluralism on the Internet in OSCE participating States. OSCE

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutanen A (2015) Towards a Pluralistic Constitutional Understanding of State Sovereignty in the European union? The Concept, Regulation and Constitutional Practice of Sovereignty in Finland and Certain Other EU Member States. Dissertation. University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law

    Google Scholar 

  • Mylly T (2009) Intellectual Property and European Economic Constitutional Law – The Trouble with Private Informational Power. Publications of IPR University Center. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy. Vaajakoski

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman S (2018) France’s Macron says he wants law to combat fake news. January 4, 2018 at https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/04/575580790/frances-macron-says-he-wants-law-to-combat-fake-news?t=1611048976370

  • Neuvonen R (2012) Sananvapauden sääntely Suomessa. Lakimiesliiton kustannus. Hansaprint. Vantaa

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuvonen R (2014) Eurooppalaisen sananvapauden ideaali ja todellisuus. In: Tiilikka P (toim./ed) Sananvapaus puntarissa. Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2013. Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen H (2008) Eurooppalainen julkisuus tutkimuksen kohteena. In: Karppinen K, Nieminen H, Mörä T (toim./eds) Onko Eurooppa olemassa? Näkökulmia Eurooppalaiseen julkisuuteen ja demokratiaan. Gaudeamus, Helsinki University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Norros L (1996) System disturbances as springboard for development of operators’ expertise. In: Engström Y, Middleton D (eds) Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuotio K (2010) Eurooppalaisen integraation uusi painopiste: Vapauden, turvallisuuden ja oikeuden Eurooppa. In: Nuotio K, Malkki L (toim./eds) Vapauden, turvallisuuden ja oikeuden Eurooppa, Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja, Forum Iuris

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyyssönen T (2006) Visuaalinen viestintä sananvapauskäsitysten haasteena. In Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2005 Kuka valvoo vapautta Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja. Helsinki 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Ojanen T (1998) The European way the structure of national court obligation under EC law. Gummerus. Saarijärvi

    Google Scholar 

  • Paasilehto S (1999) Legal cultural obstacles to the harmonisation of European law. In: Heiskanen V, Kulovesi K (eds) Function and future of European law. Publications of the faculty of law. University of Helsinki, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallero J, Pirkova E (2020) 26 recommendations on content governance - a guide for lawmakers, regulators, and company policy makers. Access Now

    Google Scholar 

  • Paukku E (2006a) Sananvapaus ja joukkoviestinnän sääntely EU:n oikeudessa. In: Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2005 Kuka valvoo vapautta Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja. Helsinki (Paukku 2006a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paukku E (2006b) Eurooppalaisen mediapolitiikan ja -sääntelyn lähtökohtia. In: Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2005 Kuka valvoo vapautta Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja. Helsinki (Paukku 2006b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paukku E (2007) Eurooppalaisen mediapolitiikan ja -sääntelyn lähtökohtia. In: Miten vapaa sana. Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2006. Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja

    Google Scholar 

  • Pere T (2015) Suojattu, suvaittu vai sanktioitu Sananvapaus. Dissertation, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickard V (2017) The Big Picture: Misinformation Society 11.28.2017 at http://www.publicbooks.org/the-big-picture-misinformation-society/

  • Pihlajarinne T (2012) Nykyaikainen internetviestintä ja tallennuspalvelut – kuka saa vastuuvapauden. In: Vastaako joku viestistä. Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2011, Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja

    Google Scholar 

  • Poiares Maduro M (2003) Europe and the constitution: what if this is as good as it gets? In: Weiler JHH, Wind M (eds) European constitution beyond the state. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Postigo M (2013) A political-philosophical analysis of the EU legal order and European integration: federal and cosmopolitan perspectives. In: Neergaard UB, Nielsen R (eds) European legal method – towards a new legal realism. DJØF

    Google Scholar 

  • Rains SA, Kenski KM, Coe K, Harwood JT (2017) Incivility and political identity on the internet: intergroup factors as predictors of incivility in discussions of news online. J Comput-Mediated Commun 22(4):163–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12191

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Raitio J (2009) Tavarakaupan rajoitusperusteet, yleinen, etu ja tilanneherkkyys - mitä uutta. Defensor Legis, 2/2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen H (2007) Denmark’s waning constitutionalism. In: Albi A, Ziller J (eds) The European constitution and national constitutions - ratification and beyond. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker WH (1976) Comments on Vincent Ostrom’s Paper. Public Choice 27:13–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosendahl R (2007) Joukkoviestin oikeudellisena käsitteenä. In: Miten vapaa sana. Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2006. Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja. Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarenpää A (1995) Tieto, suoja ja byrokratia – näkökohtia suomalaisen tietosuojan kehityksestä ja tulkinnoista. In: Oikeuskirja. Lapin Yliopiston Oikeustieteiden tiedekunta

    Google Scholar 

  • Salminen J (2010) Yksityisten oikeudellisen suojelun mahdollisuuden rajat. In: Nuotio K, Malkki L (eds) Vapauden, turvallisuuden ja oikeuden Eurooppa. Helsingin yliopiston oikeustieteellisen tiedekunnan julkaisuja, Forum Iuris

    Google Scholar 

  • Säntti R, Säntti P (2008) Tiedosta, määrittele ja hyödynnä. In: Aaltonen-Ogbeide T, Saastamoinen P, Rainio H, Vartiainen T (toim. / eds) Silmät auki sosiaaliseen mediaan. Eduskunnan tulevaisuusvaliokunta 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassi S (2008) Julkisuus kansalaisten silmin. In: Karppinen K, Nieminen H, Mörä T (toim/eds) julkisuuteen ja demokratiaan. Gaudeamus, Helsinki University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmauch M (2014) Tryck- och yttrandefrihetsgrundlagarna och EU-rätten —en kommentar till en kommentar. Svensk Juristtidning (SvJT) at https://svjt.se/svjt/2014/520

  • Schulz MS (2011) Values and the conditions of global communication. Curr Sociol 59(2):Monograph 1, March 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz PM, Peifer K-N (2017) Transatlantic data privacy law. Georgetown Law J 106:115

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw MN (2003) International Law. Cambridge University Press

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Siebert F, Siebert FT, Peterson T, Peterson TB, Schramm W (1956) Four theories of the press: the authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility, and soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. University of Illinois Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahn C (2001) Constitution without a state? Kosovo under the United Nations constitutional framework for self-government. Leiden J Int Law 14(3)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirn B (2008) Les sources constitutionnelles du droit administrative. 6ème edition, L.G.D.J

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundeep S (1997) Implementation of information technology: a time-space perspective. Org Stud 18(2):229–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069701800203

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Susen S (2011) Critical notes on Habermas’s theory of the public sphere. Sociol Anal 5(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Suthersanen U (2001) A comparative review of database protection in the European Union and United States. In: Dessemontet F, Gani R (eds) Creative ideas for intellectual property, CEDIDAC, Fondation pour le Centre du droit de l’entreprise de l’Université de Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  • Svallhammar S (ed) (1995) Kommunikationernas Europa. YMER. Svenska Sällskapet för Antropologi and Geographi

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiilikainen T, Helander P, Heliskoski J (2005) Perustuslaki Edita Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiilikka P (2012) Päätoimittajan vastuu yleisön tuottamasta verkkosisällöstä. Lakimies 1/2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuori K (2013) The relationality of European constitution(s). In: Neergaard UB, Nielsen R (eds) European legal method – towards a new legal realism. DJØF

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk P, van Hoof GJH (1990) Theory and practice on the European convention on human rights, 2nd edn. Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Vīķe-Freiberga V, Däubler-Gmelin H, Hammersley B, Poiares Pessoa Maduro LM (2013) Report of the High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism, A free and pluralistic media to sustain European democracy

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkmer I (2015) Rethinking ‘public service’ in a globalized digital ecology opendemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/ingrid-volkmer/rethinking-‘public-service’-in-globalized-digital-ecology/

    Google Scholar 

  • Vos A et Monnet V (2018) La Mécanique du Mensonge. Campus News. Magazine Scientifique de l’Université de Genève n 133 Juin 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2006) Cases and materials on EU law, 8th edn. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

Reports, Studies

  • Berggruen Institute (2020) Renewing democracy in the digital age

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun C (1992) Introduction: Habermas and the public sphere. In: Calhoun C (ed) Habermas and the public sphere. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–48

    Google Scholar 

  • CoE (2018) State of democracy human rights and the rule of law role of institutions threats to institutions 2018 Annual report from the Secretary General

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe (2018) Annual report from the Secretary General

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, European Data Protection Supervisor, and European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2018) Handbook of European Data Protection Law

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)2 on the roles and responsibilities of internet intermediaries

    Google Scholar 

  • Daten Ethik Kommission (2019) Opinion of the Data Ethics Commission. Data Ethics Commission of the Federal Government Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community Berlin, 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Draft Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the Roles and Responsibilities of Internet Intermediaries, finalized by the MSI-NET on 19 September 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Draft Report on media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union (2017/2209(INI)) Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Rapporteur: Barbara Spinelli, 2017/2209

    Google Scholar 

  • ECRI General Policy Recommendation N°15 on Combating Hate Speech - adopted on 8 December 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurobarometers 64/2005 and 251/2006

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2001) White Paper: A European Governance. Brussels, 25.7.2001 COM(2001) 428 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2017a) Special Europbarometer 461: Designing Europe's future: Trust in institutions. Globalisation. Support for the euro, opinions about free trade and solidarity Report

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2017b) White Paper on the Future of Europe: Reflections and Scenarios for the EU27 by 2025

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2018) A multi-dimensional approach to disinformation. Report of the independent High Level Group on fake news and online disinformation March

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxman AH, Wolf C (2013) Viral hate: containing its spread on the internet. St. Martin’s Press

    Google Scholar 

  • General Secretariat of the Council (2017) Taking forward the Strategic Agenda 18-month Programme of the Council (1 July 2017 - 31 December 2018)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearing of Commissioner-designate Věra Jourová at the European Parliament 7 October 2019 (AFCO- and LIBE- committees)

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann N (1997) Die Gesellschaft die Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main, p 670

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattelart A, Stourdze Y (1985) Technology, culture and communication a report to the French minister of research and industry. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V, Holland

    Google Scholar 

  • Media pluralism and democracy: Outcomes of the 2016 Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordicom (2012) Medietrender i Norden 2012. Nordicom

    Google Scholar 

  • OSCE Report 2012 ‘Freedom of Expression on the Internet’

    Google Scholar 

  • Report on concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union (2007/2253(INI))

    Google Scholar 

  • Shotter J (1993) Conversational realities. Sage Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Teubner G (2004a) Global private regimes: neo-spontaneous law and dual constitution of autonomous sectors? In: Ladeur K-H (ed) Public Governance in the age of globalisation. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 71–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Teubner G (2004b) Societal constitutionalism: alternatives to state-centred constitutional theory? In: Joerges C, Sand IJ, Teubner G (eds) Constitutional and transnational governance. Hart, Oxford, pp 3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorgeirsdottir H (2003) Journalism worthy of the name: a human rights perspective on freedom within the press. Lund

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuori K, Sankari S (2010) The many constitutions of Europe. Ashgate, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO Building Knowledge Societies At https://en.unesco.org/themes/building-knowledge-societies Last accessed on January 16, 2021

  • Walker N (2009) Reframing EU constitutionalism. In: Dunoff J, Trachtman J (eds) Ruling the world?: Constitutionalism, international law, and global governance. Cambridge University Press, pp 149–177

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2011) The limits of legislative harmonisation - ten years after Tobacco advertising. German Law J 12(3–4):850–851

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler J (1999) The constitution of Europe: “Do the new clothes have an emperor?” and other essays on European integration. Cambridge University Press, pp 226–234

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Anna Aurora Wennäkoski

Authors
  1. Anna Aurora Wennäkoski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Aurora Wennäkoski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Prof. Dr. Steffen Hindelang

  2. University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Assoc. Prof. Andreas Moberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wennäkoski, A.A. (2022). The Freedom of speech in the Digital Era: Leveraging Its Constitutional and Social Ramifications. In: Hindelang, S., Moberg, A. (eds) YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions 2021. YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions, vol 2021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/16495_2021_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/16495_2021_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-08513-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-08514-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)