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

Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungsansätze im Jugendmedienschutz

Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungsansätze im Jugendmedienschutz

Dr. Stephan Dreyer, Sünje Andresen and Neda Wysocki have published an article in the current Youth Media Protection Report. In this article, they address the systematic changes in the legal protection of minors from harmful media and the associated control advantages for interaction and communication risks. However, they also show what challenges the regulatory area will face in the coming years in terms of implementation.
 
The open access article is available (in German) in the eLibrary of Nomos Verlag.
 
You can access the article here

Excerpt
In recent years, the various legislatures have introduced new regulations in the protection of minors from harmful media that differ categorically from classic regulatory approaches in this area of law. These include the obligations of certain online providers to provide infrastructural precautionary measures in their offerings (Art. 28b AVMD-RL and, in implementation, § 5a JMStV and most recently § 24a JuSchG). Regulations that aim to consider media-external or systemic risks when assessing offerings can also be counted among such examples of newer regulatory concepts (Art. 28, 34, 35 DSA). They are emblematic of the regulatory response of legislators to newer risk potentials such as interaction and communication risks and the associated regulatory challenges. It is obvious that new or at least different control instruments must be used to counter structurally new risks. But as expected, such a reorientation of legal control instruments is not done with the introduction of new standards. They are merely the legislative impetus for a whole series of changes in the governance structure of the existing protection of children and young people from harmful media.


Dreyer, S., Andresen, S., Wysocki, N. (2022) »The best is yet to come?« Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungs- ansätze im Jugendmedienschutz ["The Best is Yet to Come?" Consequences of Changing Regulatory Approaches in Youth Media Protection]. In: JMS Jugend Medien Schutz-Report 6/22. https://doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2022-6-2


(24 January 2023)
 

Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungsansätze im Jugendmedienschutz

Dr. Stephan Dreyer, Sünje Andresen and Neda Wysocki have published an article in the current Youth Media Protection Report. In this article, they address the systematic changes in the legal protection of minors from harmful media and the associated control advantages for interaction and communication risks. However, they also show what challenges the regulatory area will face in the coming years in terms of implementation.
 
The open access article is available (in German) in the eLibrary of Nomos Verlag.
 
You can access the article here

Excerpt
In recent years, the various legislatures have introduced new regulations in the protection of minors from harmful media that differ categorically from classic regulatory approaches in this area of law. These include the obligations of certain online providers to provide infrastructural precautionary measures in their offerings (Art. 28b AVMD-RL and, in implementation, § 5a JMStV and most recently § 24a JuSchG). Regulations that aim to consider media-external or systemic risks when assessing offerings can also be counted among such examples of newer regulatory concepts (Art. 28, 34, 35 DSA). They are emblematic of the regulatory response of legislators to newer risk potentials such as interaction and communication risks and the associated regulatory challenges. It is obvious that new or at least different control instruments must be used to counter structurally new risks. But as expected, such a reorientation of legal control instruments is not done with the introduction of new standards. They are merely the legislative impetus for a whole series of changes in the governance structure of the existing protection of children and young people from harmful media.


Dreyer, S., Andresen, S., Wysocki, N. (2022) »The best is yet to come?« Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungs- ansätze im Jugendmedienschutz ["The Best is Yet to Come?" Consequences of Changing Regulatory Approaches in Youth Media Protection]. In: JMS Jugend Medien Schutz-Report 6/22. https://doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2022-6-2


(24 January 2023)
 

About this publication

Year of publication

2023

RELATED KEYWORDS

Newsletter

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

SUBSCRIBE!