Campaign Against "Fake News" a Cover for Censorship?

By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottetown, PEI] Guardian

Ever since the unexpected victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 election, the American political establishment has been bombarding the public with warnings about “fake news.”

But France, too, is not immune to this hysteria. President Emmanuel Macron has demanded that his parliamentary majority provide him with a law against “fake news” during election campaigns.

Angered last year by a phony story claiming he had an offshore account in the Bahamas, Macron has made fighting “fake news” a priority. 

His main opponent in the 2017 election, the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen, brought up the Bahamas story during a critical presidential debate. 

On Jan. 3, in a speech to journalists at the Élysée Palace, Macron told the gathering that he would aim to “protect our democracy from these false stories.” 

The measure would allow judges to block content deemed false during a three-month period preceding an election.

Judges would have 48 hours to decide if “any allegation or imputation” in a news item was “devoid of verifiable elements that would make it credible.” Only items written “in bad faith” could be blocked, and again it would be up to the judge to decide.

The president’s proposal has aroused opposition from journalists who see it as an attack on press freedom and who view it as unnecessary because the country already has legislation regarding false news stories.

The Conseil d’État pointed out on April 19 that French law already contains several measures intended to combat the dissemination of false information, in particular an 1881 law on the freedom of the press, which permits curbs on the dissemination of false information and views that are defamatory or abusive or incite hatred.

France’s media watchdog, the Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel, requires that media content reach a minimum level of accuracy and honesty.

With regard to elections, Article L97 of France’s electoral code prohibits the dissemination of false information that might influence the behavior of voters.

Critics say that it is difficult for a judge in 48 hours, in an electoral period, to decide what is fake news. They also expressed concern that the process could put journalists’ sources at risk.

The respected newspaper Le Monde warned against the “perilous nature” of information regulation. Serge Halimi, president and editorial director of its Le Monde Diplomatique edition, asserted that the proposal “reveals both the blindness of those who govern when challenged and their inclination to invent new coercive countermeasures.”

The political opposition sees the measure as a threat to democracy. “The potential risk in this law is if it winds up in the hands of a government with the wrong motives,” warned Hervé Saulignac, a Socialist member of parliament who is leading the opposition. “That’s where it could lead to catastrophe.” 

At a time “when the press is threatened around the world, it is better to protect the press,” he added.

“This is nothing less than a crude attempt at controlling information and its means of diffusion,” Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of the France Unbowed party, who also ran against Macron in last year’s election, argued. 

Constance Le Grip of Les Républicains, a right-wing group, told parliament the law was “useless, redundant, inadequate, dangerous, an attack on freedom of expression, badly written and only raises concerns instead of bringing solutions.” Le Pen, too, has attacked the proposed law as a “liberty killer.”

Macron’s bill was presented to parliament on June 7. The government wants the law to come into force before next spring.

But we should always remember that the cure is often worse than the disease. This law will not solve the problem of fake news.

But we should always remember that the cure is often worse than the disease. This law will not solve the problem of fake news. Moral panics often lead to the undermining of freedoms.