Element 68Element 45Element 44Element 63Element 64Element 43Element 41Element 46Element 47Element 69Element 76Element 62Element 61Element 81Element 82Element 50Element 52Element 79Element 79Element 7Element 8Element 73Element 74Element 17Element 16Element 75Element 13Element 12Element 14Element 15Element 31Element 32Element 59Element 58Element 71Element 70Element 88Element 88Element 56Element 57Element 54Element 55Element 18Element 20Element 23Element 65Element 21Element 22iconsiconsElement 83iconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsElement 84iconsiconsElement 36Element 35Element 1Element 27Element 28Element 30Element 29Element 24Element 25Element 2Element 1Element 66
Private Macht und Private Gewaltenteilung

Private Macht und Private Gewaltenteilung

In their article in Tagesspiegel Background, Martin Fertmann and PD. Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann discuss who should determine what could be said on platforms, how institutions can be designed for this and the role of the Facebook Oversight Board.
Few court decisions are as eagerly awaited as that of the Oversight Board on the question of whether Donald Trump should be allowed to post on Facebook again. In the end, the Oversight Board kicked the ball back into Facebook's half and ordered the social network to take another look at the Trump ban. Then it should clarify its rules, use only intended sanctions and - which will make Facebook moderately happy - investigate what influence the company's own recommendation algorithms and user design had on the polarisation of the American public and the storming of the Capitol.
Read the full article here


Subscribe to our newsletter and receive the Institute's latest news via email.