when users access media content through social networks, news aggregators or search engines, they must be able to easily identify who bears editorial responsibility. The fact that platforms do not attribute content to its source deprives the public of an essential element to judge the news. According to the proposed agreement, This criticism echoes some proposals put forward by the EBU in 2021 on the editorial protection of media organisations aimed at prohibiting any editorial decision on the part of platforms – whether to remove, suspend, disable access to or interfere with content lawfully posted online by a media organisation.
As the measures made public by the DSA do not explicitly el salvador whatsapp number data 5 million raise the question of the sovereignty of public media over their content in social-digital ecosystems, we are therefore still far from the notion of must-carry on platforms, defended by the EBU. A regulatory model for the United States? The adoption of the DSA contributes to staging an opposition between the inaction of the United States in terms of regulating digital giants and the initiative strength of the European Union.
Indeed, in the United States, while regulators have initiated antitrust proceedings against Google and Meta , no comprehensive federal law addresses the power of technology companies. Americans, above all, want to find a balance between the need for competition , to which they are attached, and the awareness that digital giants are their champions in the global competition against China. However, the agreement on the European directive comes shortly after Barack Obama 's conference at Stanford University where the former President of the United States called for regulating social networks, responsible according to him for " the weakening of democracies ".