Datafolha: majority want internet without fake news or porn – 06/29/2023 – Tech

Fake news and pornography: everything to do. At least with regard to what, in the opinion of Brazilians, should be removed from the internet.

According to a Datafolha survey carried out in May, no less than 92% of respondents would like to see networks free of scenes of misinformation. Pornography is not far behind: 89% feel that this type of material should be excluded. Considering the margin of error, two points up or down, the two types of content are tied at the top of a six-item list presented to respondents.

Soon after, images of corpses and messages of political hatred appear, which are rejected by 87% and 86% of the population, respectively. By the margin of error of this kind of ranking of infamy, both are tied with each other and with pornography, but not with fake news.

The last positions are occupied by news about celebrities in embarrassing situations and photos taken by artificial intelligence. In the first case, 81% support exclusion; in the second, 67%.

In all cases, the rejection rate is higher among women than among men, but their tolerance stands out even more when it comes to pornography (94% of them and 84% of them would like to delete this content) and the news about celebrities (87% to 75%).

The nuisance generated by photos taken by artificial intelligence, in turn, increases with age. While 47% of respondents aged 16-24 would like to remove this type of content, the rate rises to 60% among those aged 25-34 and rises to 76% for those aged 60 and over.

Although most interviewees agree on the need to exclude almost all items presented by Datafolha from the internet, there is disagreement when it comes to pointing out who is responsible for removing the materials.

For 30%, it is up to the social networks themselves to act in this kind of internet cleaning; for 29%, the responsibility lies with the users, by denouncing this type of content; for 26%, this is a government mission.

There are no gender differences in these responses, but they are evident across generations. Young people bet their chips more on social networks (37%) than on the government (19%), while older people trust the government (32%) more than the networks (25%).

This division in society —a tie within the margin of error— reflects, in a way, the problem that Congress faces when discussing the bill 2.630/2020, which establishes the Brazilian Law of Freedom, Responsibility and Transparency on the Internet, nicknamed “PL of Fake News”. Deputies prepared to vote on the legislative initiative, but it was removed from the agenda due to lack of consensus on the issue. One of the main points of contention is precisely the body in charge of supervising the application of the rules.

At the last minute, Deputy Orlando Silva (PC do B-SP), who is the project’s rapporteur, removed from the text the prediction of an autonomous supervisory entity to be created by the Executive Branch.

Critics of the measure pointed to the risk of government interference and possible censorship. Bolsonaristas, evangelical sectors and the big techs put pressure to block the vote, in a campaign that, ironically, used fake news.

Experts such as Diogo Coutinho and Beatriz Kira, however, argue that the greatest danger lies in the absence of an independent public authority to monitor compliance with the law. They maintain that the power vacuum opens up uncertainties that, in the future, may give rise to the Executive’s politicized action.

In an attempt to resolve the impasse, the Federal Council of the OAB (Brazilian Bar Association) proposed the creation of a tripartite system to oversee the law, with the participation of the three Powers, representatives of big techs and specialists.

The content removal debate is not limited to Brazil. During the Covid-19 pandemic, several countries passed laws to curb misinformation in the health area. In many of these cases, scholars have raised doubts about the effectiveness of the measures and the real purpose, as many of the regulations provide opportunities for the respective government to curb freedom of expression and the press.

Already in a post-pandemic scenario, the European Union defined, in April this year, that digital platforms will be subject to stricter controls from 2024. They will have to undergo annual audits and comply with procedures to combat disinformation and hateful rhetoric.