Germany\u2019s hate speech rules, known locally as NetzDG and which came into full force Monday<\/a>, demand that social media giants promptly remove potentially illegal material, some of it within 24 hours of being notified, or face fines of up to \u20ac50 million. Enforcement of the rules has reignited debate about their practicality in an age when a tweet, Facebook post or YouTube video can spread virally around the globe within minutes. The law also highlights the problems that policymakers, in Berlin and elsewhere, now face when trying to police what can, and cannot, be posted online, as they try to balance people\u2019s legitimate right to free speech with others\u2019 desire to be protected against harmful material.<\/p>\n \u201cI would consider it a huge coincidence if this didn\u2019t have to do with the new law,\u201d Passmann said of being blocked, adding that during the last couple of months, she has \u201ctweeted things that were significantly more extreme\u201d without being blocked.<\/p>\n Titanic, a German satirical magazine, was similarly barred<\/a> after parodying anti-Muslim comments on its own Twitter account. At the other end of the political spectrum, Beatrix von Storch, a leading figure in the far-right Alternative for Germany party, was blocked<\/a> on Twitter and Facebook after posting anti-immigrant messages. Twitter would not comment on either case, but said under certain circumstances, potentially harmful tweets may run against the company\u2019s existing terms and conditions and not be linked to the new German hate speech rules.<\/p>\n German AfD member Beatrix von Storch, seen on December 3, 2017 in Hanover, was temporarily suspended from Twitter after she posted an anti-Muslim tweet | Philipp von Ditfurth\/AFP via Getty Images<\/p>\n \u201cIt all comes down to conflicting rules with freedom of speech on one side, and human dignity on the other,\u201d said Martin Drechsler, managing director of FSM, a nonprofit organization in Berlin that works with companies to tackle digital hate speech. \u201cYou have to balance those fundamental rights against each other.\u201d<\/p>\n The controversial hate speech rules have come into the spotlight as Germany\u2019s ruling political parties \u2014 Chancellor Angela Merkel\u2019s Christian Democrats, their Bavarian ally the Christian Social Union (CSU) and the Social Democrats (SPD) \u2014 are trying to patch together<\/a> another \u201cgrand coalition\u201d and put an end to the country\u2019s unprecedented coalition deadlock, almost four months after a general election.<\/p>\n And although it was the political parties\u2019 previous alliance that passed the hate speech law, the legislation will likely reemerge on the negotiation table during the upcoming talks.<\/p>\n \u201cTo a certain degree, the concerns that we had back when we were negotiating the law with the Social Democrats now prove to be justified,\u201d said Thomas Jarzombek, a senior member of the German parliament for the CDU. \u201cThe core problem is that companies can play judges.\u201d<\/p>\n Jarzombek said Germany should change the law to include more incentives for the tech companies to set up independent, third-party agencies to examine whether content should be blocked, instead of doing it themselves.<\/p>\n \u201cBut I don\u2019t have the impression that [the SPD\u2019s] Justice Minister Heiko Maas is willing to change anything about the law,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Maas \u2014 the country\u2019s current federal justice minister, the law\u2019s architect and its most prominent advocate \u2014 was quick to defend the rules in an interview with Bild newspaper<\/a> Thursday, reiterating his position that the principle of freedom of opinion does not allow for spreading criminal content.<\/p>\n \u201cFacebook, Twitter and Co. should have no interest in their platforms being misused for crimes,\u201d he told the German publication.<\/p>\n The country\u2019s demands that social media companies take greater responsibility for what is posted online follows a government report last year<\/a> that shows Facebook managed to remove only 39 percent of illegal material within 24 hours of being notified by users. Twitter met the deadline in only 1 percent of cases, while Youtube, which removed 90 percent of flagged content within a day, was the only platform to meet the government\u2019s targets.<\/p>\n Tech executives and lobbyists have repeatedly said Germany\u2019s new hate speech rules have the potential to limit freedom of expression of the country\u2019s citizens, and that it should not be left to private companies to determine what should be allowed online.<\/p>\n The hate speech rules \u201cput companies under tremendous time pressure when examining reported content,\u201d said Bernhard Rohleder, chief executive of Bitkom, a German trade body. \u201cThe high fines reinforce this pressure. This will inevitably lead to the deletion of permitted content.\u201d<\/p>\n Germany\u2019s battle over how to tackle online hate speech \u2014 rules that are arguably the strictest anywhere in the Western world \u2014 will likely have repercussions across Europe and farther afield.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the situation becomes unbearable, then we will act with legislation\u201d \u2014 V\u0115ra Jourov\u00e1<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n As politicians from Brussels to Washington try to figure out how best to respond to the rise of such digital content, Europe\u2019s largest economy has become a pivotal test case for many other European countries, particularly France and Britain. These countries, whose lawmakers have lashed out<\/a> against social media giants for not tackling such online material, are similarly mulling new online hate speech rules to force tech giants to police what is posted online, potentially making these companies judge, jury and executioner over the billions of online posts, messages and videos that are uploaded each day.<\/p>\n The European Commission also is mulling potential new pan-EU guidelines<\/a> to expand on its existing voluntary code of conduct, to which almost all of the social media companies have signed up. In an interview last year, V\u0115ra Jourov\u00e1, the Commission\u2019s justice commissioner leading the fight against hate speech in Brussels, said large tech companies must deploy more resources to tackle the problem, or face potential new rules by the spring that may force them to comply with existing hate speech legislation, which was created for the offline world.<\/p>\n European Commissioner Vera Jourova | Emmanuel Dunand\/AFP via Getty Images<\/p>\n \u201cWe want the rule of law to be applied in the internet sphere,\u201d Jourov\u00e1 said. \u201cIf the situation becomes unbearable, then we will act with legislation.\u201d<\/p>\n Industry watchers warn, though, that a move to force tech companies to decide what is posted online could give significant powers to a few private companies like Twitter and Facebook, who could be prompted to block more content than necessary as they face draconian fines.<\/p>\n \u201cBoth sides of this debate are hardening in their positions,\u201d said Stefan Heumann, co-director of Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, a digital think tank in Berlin. \u201cThe tech community is rallying behind the platforms, but in the broader public opinion, many want to see this content taken down.\u201d<\/p>\n Heumann said that these social media companies already have the right \u2014 written as part of their terms and conditions \u2014 to dictate what is published on their online networks, and these platforms should work more closely with German law enforcement agencies so that courts, not private entities, determine what should be considered hate speech.<\/p>\n \u201cThere are some parts of the law that are totally understandable, but my main concerns are about its implementation\u201d \u2014 David Kaye<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In the U.K., politicians have called on tech companies<\/a> to take greater responsibility for potential hate speech and extremist material that is posted on their networks. These calls came after several platforms were found to have published content that ran afoul of existing national hate speech rules. In France, President Emmanuel Macron announced proposals earlier this week<\/a> that would force social media companies to be more transparent about how so-called fake news, particularly paid for by state-backed actors, was circulated on their networks.<\/p>\n In response, tech companies say they already have taken several steps, including investing millions of euros in artificial intelligence to track potential illegal material online, to combat the spread of hate speech and extremist propaganda across their networks.<\/p>\n \u201cThere are some parts of the law that are totally understandable,\u201d said David Kaye, the United Nations\u2019 rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression. \u201cBut my main concerns are about its implementation.\u201d<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/www.politico.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/GettyImages-884772588-714x476.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\nGerman coalition effect<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Watching worldwide<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
![](\"https:\/\/www.politico.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/GettyImages-673228482-714x486.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n\n