In today’s digital age, social media has opened the door to easy access to global interactions, rapid access to information, and the ability to easily find out what is happening on the other side of the world. But it has also become a battleground where hate speech, misinformation (false information shared unintentionally), and disinformation (false information shared intentionally) reign. What was once a space for open dialogue has now become a breeding ground for unstable and problematic narratives, threatening democratic stability around the world.
The hate speech and false information
Currently, the line between freedom of expression and hate speech is quite blurred; people argue that they have a right to freedom of expression and that this allows them to voice their ideas, which, however well-founded they may be, know no bounds, and this undermines the entire atmosphere within these social media platforms.
Furthermore, differing political stances trigger a massive spread of false information and news about national leaders, creating conflicts that do not even exist and putting words in the mouths of people who never said them, thereby distorting political discourse. The reality is that even if this information is later debunked, the truth may not reach everyone, and the image of these leaders has already been tarnished in the eyes of many.
Why is this problem so hard to solve?
The biggest challenge associated with this issue is the inability to harmonize regulatory frameworks across countries because, although the same social media platforms and the content posted on them are used and viewed,
respectively, by people in every country around the world, each of these countries has different laws, standards, and ethical guidelines.
These differences contribute to the instability that exists on the internet and make it impossible to create a balanced and equitable space for everyone.
What measures have the major superpowers already implemented?
European Union
In 2022, the Digital Services Act (DSA) was adopted by European Union member states and strengthened in early 2024. The DSA imposes obligations on VLOPs (Very Large Online Platforms) and VLOSEs (Very Large Online Search Engines) to identify, address, and mitigate systemic risks, including the spread of hate speech, disinformation, and misinformation. These platforms must submit an annual risk report, ensure transparency in content moderation policies, and allow access to data for researchers, aiming to create better algorithmic accountability.
Another important measure is the Code of Practice on Disinformation (2022 revision), which serves as a regulatory tool. Although VLOPs and VLOSEs are now required under the DSA to comply with some requirements, the Code includes commitments to demonetize disinformation, enhance fact-checking, and improve user tools such as content labelling.
Finally, the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO) has become central to research on the coordination of disinformation and media literacy across Member States. The EDMO collaborates with fact-checkers, researchers, and civil society to provide real-time data, enabling greater cross-border coordination.
United States of America
The USA has mostly relied on platform self-regulation, legal limits from the First Amendment and some targeted government or state-lever actions rather than one single national law.
In section 230 of the Communication Decency Act, it is presented that social media platforms should moderate user content without being treated as the
publisher of everything users post, which gives them room to remove on limit hate speech and misinformation.
The platform content moderation is the main practical tool that allows companies to label, remove, suspend, down-rank or ban accounts that spread hate speech or false content.
Besides, the government guidance and oversight efforts have aimed to push platforms towards more responsible moderation, while still staying within the First Amendment limits
China
China has taken a more state-controlled approach than the U.S or the EU, using censorship, strict platform duties and penalties for platforms and users that spread harmful content.
The Cyberspace Administration of China periodically launches enforcement drives targeting rumors, hostility, “sensational conspiracy theories”, and negative or destabilizing online sentiment.
China also increased restrictions around politically sensitive events or in regions such as Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong.
Conclusion
All of these measures are being implemented and are useful, but the truth is that they are not enough; no algorithm has the capacity to filter the thousands of pieces of content published every second across the globe, and any more drastic measures that might be taken could violate certain human rights and be misinterpreted by users. If this problem already has a 100% effective and uncontroversial solution, it is not yet known.