Udvalget for Digitalisering og It 2022-23 (2. samling)
DIU Alm.del Bilag 71
Offentligt
2695299_0001.png
A Nordic approach to
democratic debate in
the age of Big Tech
Recommendations from the Nordic
Think Tank for Tech and Democracy
1
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0002.png
Content
Preface ............................................................................................................................................
4
Summary and recommendations ..............................................................................................
5
The Nordic democratic debate in the age of Big Tech ...........................................................
7
Vision and recommendations for Nordic democratic debate
in the age of Big Tech ..................................................................................................................
13
About the Nordic Think Tank for Tech and Democracy ........................................................
30
About this publication .................................................................................................................
39
This publication is also available online in a web-accessible
version at: pub.norden.org/nord2023-004
2
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0003.png
The big question is
no longer if we need more
democratic control with
Big Tech. The question is
how and how fast
TOBIAS BORNAKKE, CHAIR
3
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0004.png
Preface
The Nordic countries are exceptional.
We have incredible levels of trust in each other.
We have a strong tradition of open public debate,
where everyone can make themselves heard. We
fiercely believe in the freedom of speech. And we
have citizens who are generally well-informed and
well-equipped to participate in public debate.
This past year the Nordic Think Tank for Tech and
We have so much to celebrate and so much to
preserve.
While social media hold great democratic
potential, we have also, in recent years, seen how
platforms not only enable democratic debate
but also impact it negatively. The spread of
false information online, whether intentional or
not, threatens factual common ground. The use
of offensive language prevents some groups
in society from joining democratic debates.
And opaque algorithms have spurred political
polarisation.
We have all come to realize that increased
democratic control with Big Tech is a necessity for
democratic societies to thrive in the increasingly
digital 21st century. The big question is no longer
if
we need more democratic control with Big Tech.
The question is
how
and
how fast.
In this regard,
the Nordic countries should take the lead in
showing the way.
Tobias Bornakke
Chair of the Nordic Think Tank
for Tech and Democracy
Our recommendations are ambitious on behalf
of the Nordic region. As we need them to be.
Together we can move towards a future, where
digital technology fulfills its democratic potential.
Democracy have done just that. Great minds from
all over the Nordic region have joined forces and
put their combined efforts into coming up with
possible initiatives to address the most pressing
challenges to the Nordic democracies. Although
we come from varying backgrounds within
communities of research, media and art, we have
been remarkably united when it comes to the
urgency of this task. Because all of us have much
to preserve.
The Nordic countries, although remarkable in
terms of trust, democracy and welfare, are
also small countries with small languages and
economies. Measured against the powers of Big
Tech, each of us may not be considered worthy
opponents. But when we join forces, our political
voice echoes louder.
4
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0005.png
Summary and recommendations
Online platforms of Big Tech companies such as
Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter
have become integral democratic infrastructure.
They allow people to connect across the world,
new communities to arise and are a popular
source of information. In addition to all their
positive potential, however, online platforms and
their algorithmic functions may cause serious
harm to our democracies and public debate.
Hate speech online may lead certain groups in
society to withdraw from public debate, and
the spread of mis- and disinformation threatens
open, transparent and factual democratic debate
and can fuel polarisation. Content moderation is
known to be minimal in smaller languages such
as the Nordics
1
and thus emphasises a greater
need to focus on these problems, especially for
vulnerable groups such as children and youth.
However, since public scrutiny is often actively
counteracted by the platforms, most of the insight
we have into the workings of these platforms
is from leaks from former employees of the
companies.
With this background, the Nordic Think Tank
for Tech and Democracy proposes the following
Nordic recommendations to protect and
strengthen the democratic debate in the age of
Big Tech.
The Nordic countries share similar cultures and
long-standing democratic values that provide an
opportunity for strengthening our democracies
even when they take increasingly place online.
Our vision for the Nordics is to be a united tech-
democratic region, with thriving citizens and
open and informed public debate taking place
across different spaces. We want the Nordics to
have vigilant public oversight over democratic
infrastructure, building resilience to already strong
Nordic public spheres.
2
5
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0006.png
1A.
Establish a Nordic Centre for Tech and Democracy to support
the enforcement of European tech regulation, share experiences
and develop new policies.
2A.
Protect the well-being and safety of children and youth online
and push for more general control for citizens.
2B.
Establish an online hub for knowledge exchange on
digital literacy.
3A.
Support the volunteers who facilitate online communities where
democratic debate unfolds.
3B.
Promote the innovation and implementation of technology that
supports open digital public debate to create alternatives to
large online platforms.
4A.
Give public service media a strong digital mandate for
online presence, content creation and development of platforms for
democratic debate online.
4B.
Step up support for independent fact-checkers.
4C.
Push for better content moderation in the Nordics.
4D.
Initiate a Nordic task force to oppose the risks to democracy from
disinformation generated by artificial intelligence.
5A.
Support access to platform data and algorithms for independent
researchers.
5B.
Commission a biennial report on the state of Nordic digital
democracies.
6
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0007.png
The Nordic democratic debate
in the age of Big Tech
Today, online platforms
3
such as Facebook,
YouTube, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter provide
channels for citizen participation in democracy
and public debate. These platforms did not exist
20 years ago, but today they allow people to
connect across the world and new communities
to arise. At their finest, they reduce distances
between people and give everybody the chance
to make their voices heard. Aside from creating
forums for interacting and exchanging opinions,
online platforms and social media have become
popular sources of news in the Nordic countries.
4
Consequently, online platforms are both
important infrastructure for following and
participating in public debate.
However, online platforms and, especially, their
algorithmic functions for recommending content
may also cause serious harm to our democracies
and public debate if not regulated properly. Online
debates are often hateful or offensive and can
threaten the freedom of speech by causing some
groups in society to withdraw entirely from public
debate.
5, 6
Particularly young people and women
seem to avoid online debates today due to the
hateful language in online debates.
7, 8
Big Tech threatens to undermine
open democratic debate
7
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0008.png
MAIN THREATS TO DEMOCRACY FROM ONLINE PLATFORMS
•
The spread of hateful content, mis- and disinformation hinders
open, transparent and informed public debate.
The easy production and spread of false information give
favourable terms to creators of content aimed to manipulate and
undermine democracy. The large amounts of data stored by online
platforms may further be abused to microtarget manipulative
content to users.
Algorithms may promote divisive and polarising content that
harms democratic debate.
Systems for taking down illegal or hateful content are less
efficient in smaller languages such as the Nordics.
The lack of transparency from the online platforms regarding their
algorithms and data collection prevents effective oversight of
societal consequences.
•
•
•
•
8
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
Another challenge is the spread of mis- and
disinformation online that threatens transparent
and factual democratic debate and may fuel
polarisation.
9, 10, 11
Factual debates and credible
sources are being further eroded due to the
accelerated prevalence and easy production of
false and biased information online.
12
Ultimately,
the scale has tipped in favour of creators of
content aimed to manipulate and undermine
democracy.
Social media are typically available to their
users free of charge. Platforms profit from
selling advertisements and, therefore, seek to
maximise the amount of time users spend on their
platforms. Rather than focusing on supporting
and promoting open democratic debates,
they seek to keep the attention of the users by
offering engaging and curated content to each
user, moderated and recommended based on
parameters that are unclear to both the users
and the public. As a result, misinformation and
disinformation, as well as other polarizing or
harmful content, thrive on online platforms
since they encourage user engagement by
evoking strong feelings such as anger.
13, 14, 15, 16
Consequently, such content may spread faster
than more moderate and factual content.
This challenge is a global one, but more pressing
in small language areas such as the Nordic region.
Online platforms rely heavily on automated
moderation to take down content that is illegal
or in violation of their terms and conditions.
Since such moderation tools are developed
primarily for content in English, this leads to less
effective moderation in small languages, and may
increase the proportion of harmful content.
17, 18
Added to this challenge, the principles of content
moderation are global, which means that they are
formulated in different cultural contexts than the
Nordic. Accordingly, Nordic historical references,
values and satire might get lost in the moderation
process, and the wrong content may be taken
down.
While these challenges endanger the democracies
of today, they are even more pressing for the
democracies of tomorrow. They also affect
the future citizens of the Nordic countries –
today’s children and youth – whose journey
towards democratic citizenship takes place in
an environment of misinformation and hateful
speech. For malignant actors who wish to
manipulate public opinion, the youth and children
are especially vulnerable since they are the
most digitally active across the population.
19, 20
Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that
the heavy use of social media and other digital
platforms by children and youth has consequences
on their general well-being. This needs to be
followed closely.
The platforms collect enormous amounts of
information about their users – from self-reported
data to behavioural data, from information on
your age to information on your health. Such
information allows online platforms to micro-
target content to individuals based on their
interests but may also be abused for manipulative
purposes, e.g., by targeting content and
advertisements specifically to certain individuals
in order to retain attention and maximise
engagement.
9
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0010.png
The lack of transparency and accountability
from online platforms regarding what citizens
are exposed to in the algorithmic user feeds,
their moderation practices and information on
what they do with our data hampers effective
public oversight. This is highly problematic since
21
Finally, the rapid development of the tech industry
and its corresponding influence on our lives for a
long time has left these companies with almost
no regulatory boundaries. Increasingly, regulation
is catching up, and societies are deciding to set
the rules for the platforms and not the other
way around. Regulation, however, have a hard
time keeping up with the intense and constant
development of technological opportunities, and
there are plenty of areas where democracies
need to do more and demand more from online
platforms.
online platforms today constitute a democratic
infrastructure that plays a central role in our
social life and society at large. Consequently, we
do not know nearly enough about how Big Tech
and their platforms influence our society and our
democratic debates, particularly how they impact
our children and young people.
22
10
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0011.png
NEW LEGISLATION ON THE WAY IN THE EU
Recently, the EU adopted the Digital Services Act,
which sets up new rules for online platforms, including
very large online platforms and search engines
such as Facebook, YouTube and Google. This new
regulation will, among others, require such platforms
to make annual assessments of systemic risks of
their platforms, including the negative impact of their
platforms on society at large, democracy and the well-
being of users. Importantly, they will be required to
take action to mitigate such harm. This new legislation
will, together with other new EU legislation – i.e., the AI
Act, the European Media Freedom Act and the Digital
Markets Act – provide a framework for any initiatives
to come, whether European, national or Nordic.
11
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0012.png
A shared Nordic perspective
The Nordic countries have strong cultural and
structural similarities. We share universal welfare
states, strong democratic traditions, a high degree
of digitalisation and social media usage, high
trust levels, strong public service broadcasters
and national newspapers, and high educational
levels.
23, 24, 25
These are characteristics of the
Nordic countries that we cherish and wish to
actively work to protect – even when the world is
changing, and our democracies are increasingly
digitalised.
In a global context, the individual Nordic countries
are both rather small in terms of population and
language making the Nordics more vulnerable
despite their generally high media literacy and
resilience against manipulation.
26
To a large
degree, we share the same challenges and
concerns when it comes to standing up to Big Tech
and protecting our democracies.
This shared background and the tradition of
Nordic cooperation provide a strong starting point
for a joint approach to strengthening our digital
democracy in light of the rapid technological
development and the rise of Big Tech. Together,
the Nordic countries should be a driver for a more
forceful and transparent approach when it comes
to how we allow Big Tech to influence our societies
and democracies in the Nordics, in Europe and
globally.
12
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0013.png
Vision and recommendations
for Nordic democratic debate
in the age of Big Tech
13
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0014.png
VISIONS
1. We want the Nordic
countries to be a united
tech-democratic region
RECOMMENDATIONS
A.
Establish a Nordic Centre for Tech and Democracy to
support the enforcement of European tech regulation,
share experiences and develop new policies
2. We want the Nordic
countries to have thriving
and digitally literate citizens
A.
Protect the well-being and safety of children and youth
online and push for more general control for citizens
B.
Establish an online hub for knowledge exchange on
digital literacy
3. We want the Nordic countries
to have access to diverse and
credible digital platforms
and communities
A.
Support the volunteers who facilitate online communities
where democratic debate unfolds
B.
Promote the innovation and implementation of technology
that supports open digital public debate to create
alternatives to large online platforms
4. We want the Nordic
countries to have open
and informed public
debates
A.
Give public service media a strong digital mandate for
online presence, content creation and development of
platforms for democratic debate online
B.
Step up support for independent fact checkers
C.
Push for better content moderation in the Nordics
D.
Initiate a Nordic task force to oppose the risks to
democracy from disinformation generated by
artificial intelligence
5. We want the Nordic
countries to have vigilant
and well-informed oversight
of Big Tech platforms
A.
Support access to platform data and algorithms for
independent researchers
B.
Commission a biennial report on the state of Nordic
digital democracies
14
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0015.png
1. A united tech-democratic region
Unifying as a tech-democratic region can help the Nordic countries pursue their
common interests and pool their resources to strengthen digital democracy in
light of the technological development and the rising influence of Big Tech. This
unity will ensure that the Nordic countries remain at the forefront of responsi-
ble digital development and remain a democratic role model internationally.
Recommendation 1A – Establish a Nordic Centre for Tech
and Democracy to support the enforcement of European
tech regulation, share experiences and develop new
policies
To effectively address some of the biggest concerns relating to the
democratic influence of Big Tech, we need strong institutions to facilitate a
coordinated Nordic effort. When the Nordics work together, we can have a
stronger starting point for dialogue within the European Union.
Accordingly, an organisational entity for Nordic collaboration on tech and
democracy can play an important foundational role as a driver and host for
Nordic initiatives within tech and democracy, covering both future initiatives
yet to emerge as well as some of the other recommendations presented in
this report.
15
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
We recommend
that the Nordic governments establish a Nordic Centre
for Tech and Democracy within the framework of the Nordic Council of
Ministers to act as a collective Nordic instrument for further initiatives to
tackle challenges arising from the increasing influence of Big Tech.
The Centre should address two main areas:
Firstly, the Nordic Centre for Tech and Democracy should organise and
coordinate a stronger Nordic voice on ambitious tech regulation and support
national enforcement. This need has grown in recent years as the tech sector
has increased lobbying resources dramatically. To secure a more level playing
field and counterbalance the discussions around digital democracy, the Centre
should pool resources and expertise from the Nordic countries. Accordingly,
the Centre should collect the most pressing challenges related to the
functions of Big Tech identified by civil society and research communities and
distribute these to relevant national and European authorities.
Secondly, the Centre should track Big Tech’s compliance with European
regulation such as the Digital Services Act in the Nordic region, to support the
relevant authorities’ enforcement of legislation. As a key part of the Digital
Services Act, the largest tech platforms will be obligated to publish an annual
risk assessment and commission an independent audit of the systemic risks of
their platforms. These new obligations should increase transparency related
to the negative impacts of their platforms on society, democracy and well-
being, especially regarding children and youth. The Nordic Centre for Tech
and Democracy should work to hold relevant tech companies responsible
by examining and challenging these assessments, potentially in the role of
a ‘trusted flagger’. To that end, the Centre should build a Nordic panel of
experts who annually present their analysis and possible objections to these
assessments. Further, they should engage with the European Commission,
which enforces the transparency obligations of very large online platforms at
the European level, as well as national authorities where relevant.
Importantly, the Centre should act independently from both the tech
sector and Nordic political systems and be led by a board of relevant Nordic
researchers, legal experts and NGOs within the field.
16
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0017.png
2. Thriving and digitally literate
citizens
For citizens to effectively handle the threats and opportunities online, they need
the skills and knowledge to critically evaluate and navigate digital media and
information. This requires media literacy in general but also, more specifically,
digital literacy. However, citizens also need the tools to control their own usage
of online platforms and to help their children navigate online life.
Recommendation 2A – Protect the well-being and safety
of children and youth online and push for more general
control for their citizens
The well-being of citizens, especially children and young people, is a
particularly pressing concern. While social media and screen time have many
positive effects, it is also associated with risks when it comes to mental
well-being in terms of unhealthy comparison culture,
27
loss of face-to-face
interaction,
28
loneliness,
29
lack of sleep
30
etc.
31
In general, we also see very low
participation of youth in public debate online, with young people themselves
blaming the harsh tone in political debate.
32, 33
Children and youth are more experimental online and are, therefore, more
exposed to online harm than adults
34
making it problematic when especially
younger children have access to platforms and forums that lack robust age
verification and parental control by design.
17
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
The Nordic countries should therefore strive towards minimising online risks
to children and young people as they are the future of our societies and
democracies.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries push for making platforms
legally obligated to offer settings that enable citizens to take more
control of their usage of platforms in their everyday lives at EU level.
These settings should be guided by a need for the well-being of citizens in
integrated online and offline lives, with a particular focus on protecting
children and youth, and the well-functioning of our democracies.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries establish a specialised
Nordic task force to 1) commission a meta-analysis on the potentially
damaging effects of social media platforms on citizen well-being and the
democratic space, and on this background 2) develop recommendations
for Nordic policy initiatives onward.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries work ambitiously to protect
minors from harmful environments and functions online. This should
include applying a precautionary principle when introducing new
functions on social media and other digital platforms. In this way, the
online platforms will, to a greater extent, have to assess, document and
counter possible harmful effects of their services.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries work to introduce a legal
demand for effective age verification and parental control as default
settings for relevant social media platforms. The policy should be
designed by drawing upon the experiences from recent similar policy
work in France, Germany and the European Union (i.e., the EU-consent
project). The Nordic countries’ policy approach should strive to grant
the best protection for Nordic minors while respecting minors’ right
to freedom of expression and their right to privacy.
35
Subsequently,
the Nordic countries should work to make such verification part of the
common EU agenda and future amendments to the Digital Services Act.
Eventually, such verification may be extended beyond verification of age
to verification of identity.
18
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
Recommendation 2B – Establish an online hub for
knowledge exchange on digital literacy
Digital literacy and source criticism are essential for citizens to fully
participate in the digital society and to understand the impact of technology
on democracy. The high level of personal curation of our online feeds may
make it harder to bridge cleavages between differing opinions since we
cannot know what information has informed those opinions. This places high
demands on individuals to understand the mechanisms curating the feeds.
Through effective digital literacy tools, the Nordic countries can empower
their citizens to distinguish between different kinds of information and
sources and their credibility and to think critically about why certain
information is presented to them in a particular way. Since contextual and
technological challenges are rapidly changing, this requires constant updating
of digital literacy competencies. Strong and systematised collaborations
across countries and actors on digital literacy could help strengthen the
impact of digital source criticism and literacy activities.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries create and run an open-access
online repository for developing and sharing best practices and methods
for digital literacy. The hub should have a capacity-building role and
create content resources including learning materials and curricula,
and provide support and education for teachers, librarians, media
professionals and other crucial actors promoting digital literacy.
19
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0020.png
3. Access to diverse and credible
digital platforms and communities
For an open and vibrant democratic debate online, we benefit from being
able to access a diverse set of fora that allow us to meet others with similar
interests and exchange opinions. However, much of the public debate unfolds,
although in different communities, on the same online platforms. Accordingly,
these platforms have massive power over our democratic debate but do not
always live up to the responsibility of protecting the public debate. Nordic
countries should strengthen transparency, accountability and social trust by
promoting diversity in platforms and communities.
Recommendation 3A – Support the volunteers who
facilitate online communities where democratic debate
unfolds
Public debate online takes place all over the internet – in the comments on
media outlets and politicians’ social media accounts and not least in open
digital communities on everything from being a new parent to the town you
live in.
36
In these digital community halls, millions of Nordic citizens participate
in the public debate, and the volunteers who organise, facilitate and moderate
the conversations carry a large responsibility. Regardless of the primary
subject of the community, a growing number of digital volunteers spend their
time caring for the health of the digital community halls while also working to
support open and trustworthy online debate.
20
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
We recommend
that the Nordic countries develop and test strategies
for supporting digital volunteers to complement the Nordic countries’
long-standing tradition of supporting an active civil society around our
democratic conversation. Such initiatives may consist of micro-funding
schemes funded by Big Tech for administrators of public groups of a
certain size to cover operation expenses, training and innovation of the
public debate within their group. They may also include the development
of free training modules to promote inclusive and vibrant digital debates
in online groups. Finally, Nordic countries may fund innovation projects
that enhance public debate by building on shared Nordic democratic
values.
Recommendation 3B – Promote the innovation and
implementation of technology that supports open digital
public debate to create alternatives to large online
platforms
Online platforms have become almost unavoidable for ordinary people in their
everyday lives. However, with the challenges for democracy and public debate,
including the blurring of lines between authentic and manipulated content,
the use of time retention strategies and the manipulation of public opinion,
alternatives for accessing public debate are pressing.
Since the online platforms of Big Tech have so many users and their business
models are based upon the acquisition of smaller platforms on the rise,
few alternatives to these platforms exist. Consequently, the promotion of
technological as well as civic innovation and implementation of technology
that enables open and trustworthy digital public debate may offer citizens
real alternatives to large online platforms. Such technologies already exist
around the world but need support in order to constitute realistic and
trustworthy alternatives to the platforms of Big Tech.
Nordic countries ought to promote innovation and implement technology that
support open digital public debate.
21
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
We recommend
that Nordic countries support the use of open standards
and protocols (such as ActivityPub) to encourage effective portability
between competing platforms.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries support funding for public and
civic actors and regulations that increase diversity in available platforms
in accordance with established state aid rules.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries ensure that policies on
business and industry promote the development of sustainable and open
democratic technologies, both at a national and a European level.
22
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0023.png
4. Open and informed public debates
The spread of misinformation and hate speech on social media can have
detrimental consequences for democracy and public debate since it may prevent
citizens from knowing fact from falsehood or from engaging in public debate
at all. Especially since some groups are proven to be more vulnerable and
exposed to these phenomena. The Nordics should have transparent and
informed public debates. Public debate in the Nordics has been characterised
by freedom of speech, education and access to credible news as well as a strong
culture of credible information use
37, 38, 39
This should continue to be the case.
Recommendation 4A – Give public service media a strong
digital mandate for online presence, content creation and
development of platforms for democratic debate online
Disinformation, diminishing trust in democratic institutions, as well as digital
divide in access to quality news content challenge democratic debate in many
countries. The Nordic countries have robust and pluralistic national media
systems where both commercial and public service media play an important
role in informing public debate. However, the latter, by nature, hold special
responsibility for fostering democratic debate and participation.
Public service media should be able to effectively navigate the digital
landscape and lead the way when it comes to transparency and the
promotion of spaces for open public dialogue.
23
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
We recommend
that Nordic public service media are given a strong
mandate for online presence and content creation. Public service media
should be given a strong mandate to freely utilise digital productions in
any relevant formats and develop new competencies and practices in
the transparent use of algorithms and technologies to strengthen public
cohesion.
We recommend
that Nordic public service media are given a mandate
to develop, together with other national and Nordic partners and in
accordance with established state aid rules, public service alternatives
to commercial online platforms for participating in democratic debate
online.
Recommendation 4B – Step up support for independent
fact-checkers
The spread of disinformation online urges democracies across the world
and in the Nordics to defend trustworthy public debate. In combination
with literacy, one way to counter the spread of false information online is
fact-checking statements and reporting online to detect and inform of new
disinformation campaigns and coordinated activities.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries step up the support to
independent fact-checking organisations that guarantee diversity,
independence, and expertise in countering mis- and disinformation.
On their part, fact-checkers should implement and continuously
improve tools and practices in their processes to sufficiently battle
false information online at a pace that matches the spread of such
information.
24
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
Recommendation 4C – Push for better content moderation
in the Nordics
Content moderation is an important tool for weeding out harmful content
on online platforms. Such moderation is to a large degree carried out by
artificial intelligence developed for content in English and with limited human
involvement in the process. The transparency of online platforms when it
comes to their moderation practices is inadequate, and this hampers public
oversight. Moderation in smaller languages may thus be of much lower
quality than in larger languages, which has consequences for whom and what
controls both freedom of speech as well as the limits hereof in the Nordic
countries.
40
The Digital Services Act establishes a right for insight into platforms’
moderation practices and a demand for biannual reporting from very large
online platforms. However, greater insight into how our democratic debate
is moderated by Big Tech is needed in order to keep trust in the democratic
system high.
Online platforms should consequently do more to support public oversight.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries jointly push for moderation of
high quality in the Nordics – both in the EU and vis-à-vis Big Tech. This
may include appeals to employ Nordic moderators who can perform
high-quality moderation of content in the Nordics with respect to the
distinct Nordic cultures, democratic values, freedom of speech and
freedom of information.
We recommend
that Nordic countries push for more transparency in
moderation practices with a view to securing transparent and high-
quality moderation in the Nordics. This should include an obligation
to disclose information on both algorithmic and manual moderation
practices categorised by language and cultural background (e.g., what
content and actors are downgraded and deleted and by whom).
25
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
Recommendation 4D – Initiate a Nordic task force to
oppose the risks to democracy from disinformation
generated by artificial intelligence
The past year brought about several breakthroughs within the area of content
generated by artificial intelligence (AI). Most publicly known was the release
of ChatGPT (GPT 3.5) with its authentic AI-powered text generation, but also
the release of other AI tools to generate image, voice, and video. These tools
mark the acceleration of an era where artificial intelligence will not only filter
our democratic conversation but also produce some of its content.
While fascinating, the misuse of this technology to manipulate and undermine
democratic debates and elections poses a particularly serious threat to the
trust-based democracies of the Nordics.
With the proposed AI Act currently being negotiated in the EU and expected
to enter into force in 2025 or 2026, AI-generated deep fakes will likely
be subject to transparency obligations where users should be informed
if a piece of content is AI-generated or manipulated. This new proposed
legislation constitutes an important step towards addressing challenges from
disinformation generated by artificial intelligence. However, we worry that
transparency will not be enough. Disinformation is created and spread with
hostile intent, and we cannot rely exclusively on hostile actors to comply with
European regulations.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries act promptly on this new
risk and commission a provisional Nordic task force on AI-powered
disinformation. Composed of experts from the interplay of tech,
policy and disinformation, and in collaboration with relevant Big Tech
companies, the task force should explore short-term mitigating actions
along with structural and long-term counter-measures to the risks from
AI-generated content to complement those proposed in the AI Act. The
results should inform the governments of the Nordic countries along with
relevant Big Tech companies and the Nordic countries should work to lift
relevant solutions to a European level to ensure efficient responses to the
rising challenge.
26
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0027.png
5. Vigilant and well-informed
oversight of Big Tech platforms
Vigilant and well-informed public oversight in the Nordic countries
effectively puts pressure on Big Tech platforms to ensure that their design
and activities align with democratic values and comply with relevant regulation
as these platforms have become an essential infrastructure for our public
debate. Public oversight helps to build trust in technology and promotes
a healthy and democratic digital ecosystem.
Recommendation 5A – Support access to platform data
and algorithms for independent researchers
Open, transparent public debate and digital well-being in the Nordic
region require a deep understanding of the information landscape and the
factors that drive the spread of information. Furthermore, it requires an
understanding of how this influences the well-being of Nordic citizens and the
well-functioning of Nordic societies.
During the last five years, researchers’ access to platform data and
algorithms has deteriorated. The amount of accessible data has decreased,
and the labour needed to gain access to data has increased to a degree where
neither the individual researchers, universities nor NGOs have the resources,
competencies or personal network needed to achieve proper data access. Our
democracies thus risk losing basic empirical insights into the user behaviour
and working of the platforms upon which our digital democracies unfold.
27
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
While the Digital Services Act aims to address this problem by offering
formal rights for researchers to request access to data from very large online
platforms and search engines of systemic risks for society, we worry that
some platforms might attempt to limit access to data-sharing solutions
through bureaucratic processes and demands that few researchers will know
how to navigate. Furthermore, researchers may need assistance to comply
with the demands for data protection and confidentiality set out in the
Digital Services Act to gain data access.
Consequently, we worry that formal rights of access will not provide the
desired knowledge and insight without support.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries work to ensure that no
independent researcher with the intent to produce research for the good
of society can be excluded from doing so. Accordingly, platforms’ terms
of service should not prevent data access for researchers who comply
with relevant regulation and scientific integrity, even if this involves the
use of web scraping techniques.
We recommend
that the Nordic countries establish an office to support
Nordic actors’ access to platform data by guiding researchers in their
application processes and helping researchers comply with rules on
data protection and confidentiality when carrying out their research.
Additionally, the office should gather and distribute knowledge of what
research applications other European researchers have been granted
data access to with the purpose of creating transparency on data access
and supporting the production of future research.
We recommend
that the office should work on ensuring sustainable and
sovereign data storage solutions where data access is administered and
provided through an independent Nordic entity outside Big Tech (e.g., a
collaboration between national Nordic statistical agencies).
41
Research access to the platforms is crucial for the well-being of our
democracies, and accordingly a permanent organisation with this specific
aim and with permanent staff is needed to sufficiently ensure that the Nordic
societies gain the full advantage of the novel rights within the Digital Services
Act. A collaboration among the Nordic countries will make any effort even
more powerful as it will allow for more effective knowledge sharing and
gathering of expertise.
28
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
Recommendation 5B – Commission a biennial report on
the state of Nordic digital democracies
When the democratic debate unfolds online, the fate of democracy is
put in the hands of privately owned online platforms. Any change in their
algorithms, platform designs or moderation practices means an adjustment
in the dynamics of democratic debates, often without any prior democratic
discussion or even knowledge of the altered algorithms.
We recommend
that the Nordic Council of Ministers for Culture
commission a biennial report on the state of Nordic digital democracies
that can inform public debates on strengthening our societies and
democratic debates in the age of Big Tech. The report should provide
a comprehensive picture of the current state of the Nordic digital
democracies while also identifying potential risks and challenges for the
future, including assessing the Nordic ecosystem and content moderation
practices of very large online platforms.
We recommend,
with inspiration from Reuters Digital News Report and
as part of the commissioned report, creating a Nordic Tech-Democracy
Index to systematically track developments in our digital democracy over
time. Parameters may include digital civic and political participation,
trust level and the level and spread of hate speech, misinformation and
disinformation distributed across platforms and countries.
29
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0030.png
About the Nordic Think Tank
for Tech and Democracy
In 2021, the Nordic Council of Ministers for Culture
decided to establish a temporary think tank for
addressing the influence of Big Tech on democratic
debate in the Nordic countries.
The purpose of the Nordic Think Tank for Tech and
Democracy has been to discuss the increasing
influence of social media and Big Tech on
democratic debate in the Nordic countries and
recommend possible political actions to protect
and strengthen Nordic digital democracy.
The Think Tank was appointed in May 2022 and
consists of 13 members from all over the Nordic
Region: Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland,
Iceland, Greenland, Faroe Islands and Åland.
The work of the Think Tank has been organised
around three physical meetings in Copenhagen
between September 2022 and February 2023.
The Ministry of Culture, Denmark, has served as
Secretariat to the Think Tank.
30
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0031.png
31
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0032.png
Members
Tobias Bornakke
(chair), Denmark, is a researcher
and co-founder of Analyse & Tal. Tobias holds a
PhD in digital methods and has led several studies
on the democratic debate on social media across
the Nordic countries.
Anja Bechmann,
Denmark, is a professor at Media
Studies and director of DATALAB at Aarhus
University. Anja is also the Principal Investigator
of the Nordic Observatory for Digital Media and
Information Disorder (NORDIS).
Bente Kalsnes,
Norway, is a professor at the
School of Communication, Leadership and
Marketing at Kristiania University College. Bente
has served as a member of the Freedom of
Speech Commission appointed by the Norwegian
government.
Signe Ravn-Højgaard,
Greenland, is an assistant
Carl Heath,
Sweden, is a senior researcher at the
Research Institute of Sweden (RISE). Carl has
previously been commissioned by the Swedish
Government as Special Counsel for the protection
of democratic dialogue.
Sumaya Jirde Ali,
Norway, is a poet and former
Elfa Ýr Gylfadóttir,
Iceland, is the director of the
Icelandic Media Commission. Elfa has been Head
of Division of Media at the Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture and has been lecturing at the
University of Iceland for 25 years.
Thorgeir Ólafsson,
Iceland, is a senior advisor at
Fredrik Granlund,
Åland, is a journalist and
program manager at Ålands Radio and TV (public
service). Fredrik has worked as a journalist for 25
years and is interested in the relations between
humans and new technology.
From the Ministry of Culture, Denmark, Marie
Hanna Haaslahti,
Finland, is a media artist and
director working with image and interaction.
Hanna is interested in computer vision and its
social implication on human relations and has
participated in many international exhibitions.
Funch Adamsen and Janus Emil Mariager have
served as Secretariat to the Think Tank.
the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service (RÚV).
Thorgeir has worked as a press officer and has
been responsible for mass media in the Ministry of
Education, Science and Culture.
editor of the feminist culture magazine Fett.
Sumaya has written three poetry collections and
received the Zola award for civil courage for her
work and participation in the public debate.
professor pursuing a PhD at the University
of Greenland. Signe’s research is on how
digitalisation and the use of social media affect
small democracies.
Jákup Brúsá,
Faroe Islands, is a digital marketing
consultant and has worked with 100+ companies.
Jákup’s research on political communication
was published in the International Journal of
Information Technology and Politics.
Martin Holmberg,
Sweden, is a programme
manager at Medier & Demokrati, Lindholmen
Science Park. Martin has previously worked in
media organisations as a journalist, editorial
leader and in leadership roles on digitalisation.
Minna Aslama Horowitz,
Finland, is a docent and
senior researcher at the University of Helsinki.
Minna is a member of the Nordic Observatory for
Digital Media and Information Disorder (NORDIS)
and a fellow at St. John’s University.
32
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0033.png
Disclosure of financial ties
Ahead of the work, all 13 members of the Think Tank handed in their individual disclosures
of potential financial ties to Big Tech companies in order to secure transparency within the
group on any relations to the industry in question.
33
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0034.png
Notes
1.
Ytringsfrihetskommisjonen (2022). En åpen og opplyst offentlig samtale.
Ytringsfrihetskommisjonens utredning. Retrieved from Regjeringen.no:
https://www.
regjeringen.no/contentassets/753af2a75c21435795cd21bc86faeb2d/no/pdfs/
nou202220220009000dddpdfs.pdf
2.
Humprecht, E., Esser, F., & Van Aelst, P. (2020). Resilience to Online Disinformation: A
Framework for Cross-National Comparative Research. The International Journal of
Press/Politics, 25(3), 493–516.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219900126
3.
In the following report, we focus specifically on the social media platforms
of Big Tech that are “very large online platforms” in the sense of the Digital
Services Act. Very large online platforms according to the Digital Services
Act are online platforms “which have a number of average monthly active
recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million”
(Digital Services Act, article 33).
4.
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C.T., Eddy, K. & Nielsen, R.K. (2022).
Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2022. Retrieved from Reuters Institute:
https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Digital_
News-Report_2022.pdf
5.
Zuleta, L. & Laursen, S. K. (2019). Demokratisk Deltagelse på Facebook.
Retrieved from Institut for Menneskerettigheder:
https://menneskeret.dk/
sites/menneskeret.dk/files/04_april_19/Rapport%20om%20demokratisk%20
deltagelse.pdf
6.
Zuleta, L., Steffensen, T., Bahat, Y. & Kroustrup, J. (2022). Den offentlige
debat på Facebook. En undersøgelse af danskernes debatadfærd. Retrieved
from Institut for Menneskerettigheder:
https://menneskeret.dk/sites/
menneskeret.dk/files/media/document/Den%20offentlige%20debat%20
p%C3%A5%20Facebook%2C%20analysenotat%2C%20maj%202022_0.pdf
7.
Zuleta, L. & Laursen, S. K. (2019). Demokratisk Deltagelse på Facebook.
Retrieved from Institut for Menneskerettigheder:
https://menneskeret.dk/
sites/menneskeret.dk/files/04_april_19/Rapport%20om%20demokratisk%20
deltagelse.pdf
8.
Medietilsynet (2023). Digitale dilemmaer – en undersøkelse om barns
debut på mobil og sosiale medier. Retrieved from Medietilsynet:
https://
www.medietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/barn-og-medier-
undersokelser/2022/230206_digitale-dilemmaer.pdf
34
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0035.png
9.
Benkler, Y., Faris, R. & Roberts, H. Network Propaganda: Manipulation,
Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics. Network Propaganda
(Oxford University Press, 2018).
10. Osmundsen, M., Bor, A., Vahlstrup, P. B., Bechmann, A., & Petersen, M. B.
(2021). Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind
Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter. American Political Science Review,
115(3), 999-1015.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421000290
11. Altay, S., Berriche, M., & Acerbi, A. (2023). Misinformation on Misinformation:
Conceptual and Methodological Challenges. Social Media + Society, 9(1),
20563051221150412.
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221150412
12. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news
online. Science 359: 1146–1151.
13. Charquero-Ballester, M., Walter, J. G., Nissen, I. A. & Bechmann, A. (2021).
Different types of COVID-19 misinformation have different emotional
valence on Twitter. Big Data Soc. 8, 20539517211041280.
14. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news
online. Science 359: 1146–1151.
15. Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E. & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence
of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. 111, 8788–8790.
16. Horwitz, J. & Seetharaman, D. (26. maj 2020). Facebook Executves Shut
Down Eforts to Make the Site Less Divisive. Retrieved from The Wall Street
Journal:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-
division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499
17. Ytringsfrihetskommisjonen (2022). En åpen og opplyst offentlig samtale.
Ytringsfrihetskommisjonens utredning. Retrieved from Regjeringen.no:
https://
www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/753af2a75c21435795cd21bc86faeb2d/
no/pdfs/nou202220220009000dddpdfs.pdf
18. Pedersen, K & Oehlenschlâger, M. (5. juli 2022). Danskerne er særligt udsatte
for hadtale online, forditechgiganterne ikke taler dansk. Retrieved from
Information:
https://www.information.dk/debat/2022/07/danskerne-saerligt-
udsatte-hadtale-online-fordi-techgiganterne-taler-dansk?lst_frnt
35
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0036.png
19. Slots- og Kulturstyrelsen (2020). Mediernes udvikling i Danmark: Sociale
medier 2020 - Brug, indhold og relationer. Retrieved from Kulturministeriet:
https://mediernesudvikling.kum.dk/fleadmin/user_upload/dokumenter/
medier/Mediernes_udvikling/2019/Specialrapporter/Sociale_medier_indhold/
Sociale_medier_-_brug__indhold_og_relatoner.pdf
20. Medietilsynet (2022). Unges erfaringer med hatefulle ytringer. Retrieved from
Medietilsynet:
https://www.medietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/
kritisk-medieforstaelse/2022-rapport-hatefulle-ytringer.pdf
21. Bruns, A. (April 25 2018). Facebook shuts the gate after the horse has bolted,
and hurts real research in the process. Retrieved from Internet Policy Review:
https://policyreview.info/articles/news/facebook-shuts-gate-after-horse-has-
bolted-and-hurts-real-research-process/786
22. European Digital Media Observatory (2022). Report of the European Digital
Media Observatory’s Working Group on Platform-to-Researcher Data
Access. Retrieved from EDMO:
https://edmoprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/
uploads/2022/02/Report-of-the-European-Digital-Media-Observatorys-
Working-Group-on-Platform-to-Researcher-Data-Access-2022.pdf
23. Hallin, D. C. & Mancini, P. Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media
and Politics. (Cambridge University Press, 2004).
24. Syvertsen, T., Enli, G., Mjøs, O. J. & Moe, H. The Media Welfare State: Nordic
Media in the Digital Era. (University of Michigan Press, 2014).
https://doi.
org/10.2307/j.ctv65swsg
25. Ravn-Højgaard, S., Jóhannsdóttir, V., Karlsson, R., Olavson, R., & í Skorini,
H. (2021). Particularities of media systems in the West Nordic countries.
Nordicom Review, 42(S2), 102–123.
https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0020
26. Humprecht, E., Esser, F., & Van Aelst, P. (2020). Resilience to Online
Disinformation: A Framework for Cross-National Comparative Research.
The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(3), 493–516.
https://doi.
org/10.1177/1940161219900126
27. Børns Vilkår (2020). Køn, krop og digital adfærd. Hvordan mindsker vi presset
på børn og unge online. Retrieved from Børns Vilkår:
https://bornsvilkar.dk/
wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Pres-og-stress-Krop-k%C3%B8n-og-digital-
adf%C3%A6rd.pdf
36
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0037.png
28. Ottosen, M.H., Andreasen, A.G., Dahl, K.M., Lausten, M., Rayce, S.B. &
Tagmose, B.B. (2022). Børn og unge i Danmark. Velfærd og trivsel 2022.
Retrieved from VIVE:
https://www.vive.dk/media/pure/18610/14872861
29. Ottosen, M. H. & Andreasen, A. G. (2020). Børn og unges trivsel og brug
af digitale medier - to analysenotater. Retrieved from VIVE:
https://www.
vive.dk/media/pure/15089/4329811
30. Ottosen, M.H., Andreasen, A.G., Dahl, K.M., Lausten, M., Rayce, S.B. &
Tagmose, B.B. (2022). Børn og unge i Danmark. Velfærd og trivsel 2022.
Retrieved from VIVE:
https://www.vive.dk/media/pure/18610/14872861
31. Medietilsynet (2023). Digitale dilemmaer – en undersøkelse om
barns debut på mobil og sosiale medier. Retrieved from:
https://
www.medietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/barn-og-medier-
undersokelser/2022/230206_digitale-dilemmaer.pdf
32. Zuleta, L. & Laursen, S. K. (2019). Demokratisk Deltagelse på Facebook.
Retrieved from Institut for Menneskerettigheder:
https://menneskeret.
dk/sites/menneskeret.dk/files/04_april_19/Rapport%20om%20
demokratisk%20deltagelse.pdf
33. Medietilsynet (2023). Digitale dilemmaer – en undersøkelse om
barns debut på mobil og sosiale medier. Retrieved from
https://
www.medietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/barn-og-medier-
undersokelser/2022/230206_digitale-dilemmaer.pdf
34. Medietilsynet (2023). Digitale dilemmaer – en undersøkelse om barns
debut på mobil og sosiale medier. Retrieved from Medietilsynet:
https://
www.medietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/barn-og-medier-
undersokelser/2022/230206_digitale-dilemmaer.pdf
35. CNIL (2022). Online age verification: balancing privacy and the protection
of minors. Retrieved from CNIL:
https://www.cnil.fr/en/online-age-
verification-balancing-privacy-and-protection-minors
36. Analyse & Tal (2022). Danmarks Digitale Medborgerhuse. Retrieved from
Analyse & Tal:
https://www.ogtal.dk/assets/files/Danmarks-Digitale-
Medborgerhuse_compressed_2023-03-14-102118_vuig.pdf
37
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0038.png
37. Hallin, D. C. & Mancini, P. Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of
Media and Politics. (Cambridge University Press, 2004).
38. Syvertsen, T., Enli, G., Mjøs, O. J. & Moe, H. The Media Welfare State:
Nordic Media in the Digital Era. (University of Michigan Press, 2014).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv65swsg
39. Ohlsson, J., Blach-Ørsten, M., & Willig, I. (2021). Covid-19 och de nordiska
nyhetsmedierna. NORDICOM.
https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855473
40. Ytringsfrihetskommisjonen (2022). En åpen og opplyst
offentlig samtale. Ytringsfrihetskommisjonens utredning.
Retrieved from Regjeringen.no:
https://www.regjeringen.no/
contentassets/753af2a75c21435795cd21bc86faeb2d/no/pdfs/
nou202220220009000dddpdfs.pdf
41. Møller, L. A., Walter, J. G., & Bechmann, A. (2020). Evaluating safe space
solutions including data management and processing setups. Aarhus
Universitet. Retrieved from Social Observatory for Disinformation and
Social Media Analysis:
https://www.disinfobservatory.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/08/SOMA_D2.1.pdf
38
 DIU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 71: Publikation fra Nordisk Tænketank for Tech og Demokrati "En nordisk tilgang til den demokratiske debat i techgiganternes tidsalder"
2695299_0039.png
About this publication
A Nordic approach to democratic debate
in the age of Big Tech: Recommendations from
the Nordic Think Tank for Tech and Democracy
Nord 2023:004
ISBN 978-92-893-7535-1 PDF
ISBN 978-92-893-7536-8 ONLINE
http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/nord2023-004
© Nordic Council of Ministers 2023
Cover photo: Magnus Fröderberg/Norden.org
Photo of the members: Charlotte de la Fuente/norden.org.
Photo of Tobias Bornakke: Rasmus Preston. Photos to the recommendations:
1-2: Unsplash.com 3-4: Norden.org 5: Unsplash.com
Published: 18.04.2023
Nordic co-operation
Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional
collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the
Faroe Islands, Greenland and Åland.
Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, economics and culture and
plays an important role in European and international forums. The Nordic
community strives for a strong Nordic Region in a strong Europe.
Nordic co-operation promotes regional interests and values in a global world.
The values shared by the Nordic countries help make the region one of the
most innovative and competitive in the world.
The Nordic Council of Ministers
Nordens Hus
Ved Stranden 18
DK-1061 Copenhagen
www.norden.org
Read more Nordic publications on www.norden.org/publications
The Ministry of Culture, Denmark, has
served as Secretariat to the Think Tank.
39