The revolution induced by the increasing digitalisation of our society has impacted the transmission of information, diversified media sources, and resulted in a wider range of information consumers. As a result, campaigns against disinformation have become a high-priority challenge for institutions and media stakeholders. The arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the dangers of disinformation as it posed a risk to public health and became an obstacle to vaccination campaigns in the EU.

The disinformation crisis has particularly impacted the media sector, as general trust decreased and harassment against journalists has even led to some mortal victims. Additionally, 83% of Europeans think “fake news” are a threat to democracy. On the other hand, media regulations imposed as a response to the diffusion of “fake news” have been said to compromise media freedom. Hence, measures tackling the issue must find a balance between the monitoring and reporting of misleading information, and the protection of the fundamental right of freedom of speech.

In March 2015, the European External Action Service (EEAS) was tasked with countering disinformation and actively implementing measures on the matter. The Strategic Communication Task Forces have been created in the EEAS and consist of experts to address the issues and develop response strategies against disinformation campaigns. Currently, the EEAS has set up the Western Balkans Task Forces for the corresponding region, the Southern Task Forces for the Middle East and Northern Africa and the Eastern Task Forces, with special focus on the Russian Federation.

In order to support fact-checking organisations and strengthen the EU media ecosystem, the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO) was created. The EDMO, with a governance structure independent from public authorities, serves as a hub for cooperation between media organisations, fact-checkers, and other relevant stakeholders in the fight against disinformation.

Reporters without Borders (RSF) is an international and independent NGO with consultative status with the Council of Europe and the United Nations. RSF publishes reports about the state of freedom of information and issue recommendations for the relevant stakeholders.

The spread of disinformation represents an issue to democracy. Reports say interferences were detected in the 2019 European elections through manipulative political ads. Information pollution in our digitally connected world is set to polarise societies and tamper with the ability of citizens to make informed decisions. It also diminishes trust in institutions and media. Surveys show that 18% of European citizens view their governments as “very responsible” for the spread of fake news. According to the Edelman Trust Barometer, trust in information sources reached record lows in 2021, threatening COVID-19 recovery, as people were suspicious and hesitant about the vaccination process. As a matter of fact, there is less willingness to get the vaccine among those with poor information hygiene.

Many EU countries have failed at finding a balance between upholding media freedom and tackling fake news, for instance, Germany’s NetzDG law, targeting illegal or abusive media content, was criticised for curtailing free speech. Meanwhile, in a number of countries across the world, including EU Member States such as Hungary, increasing concern about disinformation has been used to pass measures that aim to silence political dissent and limit freedom of speech. In the 2020 World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters for Freedom (RSF), measures taken to tackle disinformation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic have been reported to threaten media freedom, a claim that was also endorsed by Amnesty International.

Moreover, in the RSF report, the crisis of trust is identified as a major risk to media freedom, raising concerns on how journalists have become the target of public anger, resulting in increased cases of harassment and even death. Interference in editorial and management decisions of the media also exist in the form of extortion, through SLAPPs aiming to silence media outlets and hinder independent and free speech. No Member State has passed targeted legislation against SLAPPs despite the Parliament’s agreement in the need to counteract this threat.

In recent years, the European Union has been developing an action plan to target the aforementioned issues. In 2019, the EEAS launched the Rapid Alert System (RAS), in the context of the European elections as an information-sharing system connecting the EEAS, the G7 Rapid Response Mechanism and NATO, pursuing to expose disinformation and threats to elections. Nevertheless, interferences and manipulation of voter opinion were still reported.

Noting the impact of disinformation on democratic processes, the European Commission presented the European Democracy Action Plan (EDAP) in December 2020. In the EDAP, the Commission and the High Representatives committed to improving the existing measures against disinformation (including RAS), as well as implementing a coordinated legal framework to regulate, support, and protect the rights of the media sector. The EDAP defines the current EU strategy in the matter, with its measures being recently implemented or are expected to be adopted by the end of 2022.

In September 2021, the European Commission adopted a Recommendation on the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists, setting concrete actions for Member States to take, in order to protect journalists and safeguard media diversity and pluralism. Funding programmes such as the Creative Europe Programme, with a planned budget of EUR 2.5 billion, aim to stimulate cultural diversity and ensure support for media freedom, also promoting cross-sector cooperation and journalism partnerships.

Alongside the EDAP, the Digital Services Act (DSA) was proposed by the end of 2021, setting up a pan-European legal framework to promote transparency and accountability among online platforms. Moreover, the Commission is developing the Media Freedom Act and the Media and Audiovisual Action Plan (MAAP), the first one currently in a Public Consultation phase. The initiatives’ key objectives are to regulate and support the media sector while safeguarding pluralism, editorial independence, and media diversity.

In 2018, the Commission developed an Action Plan Against Disinformation, creating the European Digital Media Observatory and proposed the Code of Practice on Disinformation, setting up a range of commitments signed by online platforms such as Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter, an unprecedented self-regulatory strategy, agreed by the industry, to counteract disinformation. Signatories present their own roadmaps to implement the Code of Practice, committing to concrete actions aiming to ensure transparent campaign activities and address the spread of disinformation. Under the actions of the EDAP, the Commission, in cooperation with signatories, presented a Guidance to strengthen the Code of Practice and strive to improve the Monitoring Programme, as a response to reporting issues with signatories and the need to tackle COVID-19 disinformation.

Being aware of the actions to counter disinformation and support the media sector, concerns are being raised about the impact these will have on media freedom. Legal restraints to the flow of information, as part of a strategy to fight “fake news”, are conditioned by the fine line between preventing the spread of disinformation and limiting the freedom of the media sector. In addition to the limited or yet not completely functional tools to monitor and identify misinformation, especially in the digital platforms, this issue should be at the scope of institutions and stakeholders, and should aim to develop a coordinated and transparent strategy.

• How should the EU ensure that the identification and reporting of disinformation is done objectively and impartially?
• How does improving the safety of journalists in Europe benefit media freedom and pluralism?
• What should be the European Commission’s approach for the Media Freedom Act to effectively accomplish its objectives?
• What lessons can we learn from the information epidemic that began with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic?
• How do regulations over the media sector and measures against disinformation affect artistic freedom and cultural media outlets?