The topic for the European Union Crisis Simulation is the fight against fake news, misinformation, and disinformation campaigns during the Coronavirus Crisis, at a European level.
On June 10th, 2020, the European Commission came forward with having identified reputable media sites and mainstream political forces that promoted Russian and Chinese narratives and advanced them through their media outlets. The same day, the Chinese Foreign Ministry rejected an EU report accusing China and Russia of running disinformation campaigns, saying China is a victim, not a fabricator, of disinformation."
“Foreign actors and certain third countries, in particular Russia and China, have engaged in targeted influence operations and disinformation campaigns around COVID-19 in the EU, its neighbourhood and globally, seeking to undermine democratic debate and exacerbate social polarisation, and improve their own image in the COVID-19 context,” a communication states. Examples of disinformation, the Commission says, include false advice such as ‘drinking bleach or pure alcohol can cure the coronavirus’ or conspiracy theories, like the claim that coronavirus is ’an infection caused by the world’s elites for reducing population growth. The equation seems to be simple: engage in programs and pass laws that have as an object the control and elimination, as well as the prevention of fake news that penetrate the European context.
The European Union is at a crossroads. Besides eradicating the COVID-19 pandemic, a new crisis has emerged: misinformation, disinformation, and fake-news generated one. Of utmost concern is how fragmented the European institutions are. On one hand, they are purely dependent on each other to manage the crisis. On the other hand, elements of national interest, sovereignty, and external threats seem to gain ground, posing a real challenge to achieving cooperation and an optimal, rapid and efficient crisis management plan.
The EU needs a course correction in its approach to disinformation and fake news. Your mission in this simulation is to adapt the already existing policies and optimize their reach, improve their impact, and destroy the overarching enemy: the constant flux of misinformation, disinformation, and fake news. In fulfilling this mission, you have two strong allies: your peers, the Directorate-General experts, and your knowledge. Be creative, intuitive, and do your best in solving the Crisis.
In this simulation, four main stakeholders will work together in solving the European health crisis:
Duration: 60 minutes
Participants will meet in their breakout rooms and they will share their goals and redlines, according to their role.
The Parliament: In the Parliament, a Chairperson will give the floor to each representative from the political groups to deliver their goals as a party. After the Speeches, the Parliament will have to find a common ground or a majority- this means forming alliances, making compromises and strategic decision-making.
The Council: The Council will do a roundtable discussion, where the Portuguese President will act as the Chairperson. Each state representative will state its interests and its strategic priorities, according to their role. After that, there will be intense negotiations and the member states will try to align their policies and interests.
The Commission: In the Commission, there aren‘t conflicting positions. The Commission will have to debate some of the already existent policies adopted by the real-life Commission and identify some flaws. This exercise is useful in giving students some ideas about what they should include in the upcoming Position Paper. After this, the Commission will conduct Impact Assessment Meetings- structured negotiations with the lobby groups.
Lobby Groups: Lobbyists will get to know each other and they will create their own lobby strategy. They will try to meet with a different representative from all of the institutions and will participate in the Impact Assessment Meetings.
Duration: 60 minutes
Each of the institutions (including the lobby groups) will have to come up with their Position Paper in 60 minutes. The participants will be given an example of a Position Paper before the simulation, in order for them to know how to write one.
Duration: 30 minutes
After having finished their official institutional Position Paper, each participant is free to negotiate with other players. They can try and find details on the others‘ Position Paper or they can try and secure some alliances for the upcoming negotiations. After that, each institution will have 10 minutes to decide if, after what they have learned from the other actors, they want to modify their own position paper or if they are confident with how it is. At the end of this, each institution will make their position paper available for the others.
Duration: 60 minutes
At this stage, all the institutions will be gathered in the form of a colloquium. Based on the information participants have gathered, as well as on their initial positions (as revealed by the position papers they have delivered), all the institutions must cross-examine their counterparts. In this sense, all the institutions will have to read and explain their positions paper, while the others are allowed to ask a limited number of questions that might allow them to better understand the motivation of each side. Given that the objectives of each institution are represented through the position paper, at this stage of the simulation participants need to ask questions that inform them of the (hidden) objectives of the others (like the red lines of a party, or the national interest of a country), in order to prepare them to propose amendments.
Duration: 60 minutes
Continuation of the previous activity. After all the institutions have presented their position paper and they have cross-examined each other, they will continue to negociate to find a common ground.
Duration: 60 minutes
The goal of this section is for the Parliament and the Council to proposed amendments to the Commission‘s position and to ultimately come up with a Crisis Solution Plan. Each amendment will be negotiated and they will be written down, as they are being proposed. Lobby Groups can make suggestions but their amendments will not be written down unless their allies strongly support them.
Duration: 30 minutes
Each amendment written down during the last activity will be voted by all the participants. Ultimately, the accepted amendments will result in modifications to the original position paper formulated by the Commission, while the rejected amendments will be dropped altogether.
A position paper presents one side of an arguable opinion about an issue, similar to a debate. The scope of a position paper is to convince the audience that your opinion is valid. Ideas that you are considering need to be carefully examined in choosing a topic, developing your argument, and organizing your paper. It is very important to ensure that you are addressing all sides of the issue and presenting it in a manner that is easy for your audience to understand.
Each institution should submit one (1) position paper, and lobby groups should submit 1 position paper per group. Position papers should be 2-3 pages in length and should be divided into three sections per issue. These sections should include:
An introduction of the topic and policy statement;
How the topic relates to your institution, what measures your institution has taken to address the issue;
Desired policy outcomes from the institution;
When writing a position paper, proper format is essential. Please follow the format as provided in the Sample Position Paper using the following standards:
• Length may not exceed three pages.
• A statement introducing the topics to be discussed in the committee must be included.
• Topics must be clearly labeled in separate sections.
• The name of the institution must be clearly labeled on the first page.
• https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/130d1/WritingaPositionPaper.htm
• http://www.ala.org/yalsa/aboutyalsa/yalsahandbook/whitepapers
• https://www.solidaridadnetwork.org/publications/position-paper-on-european-regulatory-framework/
• https://reliefweb.int/report/world/localised-response-covid-19-global-pandemic-a4ep-position-paper
The DG for this simulation is DIRECTORATE-GENERAL (CONNECT)- Communications Networks, Content and Technology;
The Directorate‐General for Communications Networks, Content, and Technology is the Commission department responsible to develop a digital single market to generate smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth in Europe. Having well-informed citizens increases the efficiency of the measures, and therefore the Commission’s ambition is to ensure the accessibility, authenticity, and trustworthy sources in the EU.
• DG Connect develops and carries out the Commission’s policies. In this simulation, you will have to design, change or adapt the existing policies to fit the development of the spread of fake news in the context of the Coronavirus crisis. You will have to come up with a position paper.
• While having established the policies, you must start negotiating your position paper with the other stakeholders by using Impact Assessments or through individual unstructured meetings;
• How to conduct impact assessment meetings? Impact assessments are carried out on initiatives expected to have significant economic, social, or environmental impacts. In this simulation, DG CONNECT has the power of conducting Impact Assessment Meetings with the lobby representatives, to find out how a certain policy would affect the groups they represent.You will be provided at the beginning of the simulation with an impact assessment report template
• The improved protection of the democratic systems, more resilient societies, ones more prepared for future challenges, and democracies resistant to hostile actors spreading disinformation.
• To coordinate, complement, and initiate measures to deal with every aspect of the coronavirus pandemic.
• Greater transparency and higher accountability, for online platforms (such as Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok).
• Ensuring the freedom of expression and democratic debate as well as protecting and empowering citizens
• The Commission cannot overlook the reviews made by the Parliament and the Council and, if there is an agreement, the Commission must fairly try to integrate the views of the stakeholders (interest groups). It has to respect its goals and principles when developing policies assessed through impact assessment studies or meetings.
The political groups from the European Parliament that play a role in this simulation are the European People’s Party (EPP), Socialists and Democrats (SD), Renew Europe (RENEW), and the Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens-EFA).
The Committee that has the competency of dealing with limiting the spread of fake news in the European Parliament is the AFET(Foreign Affairs) committee.
The European Parliament emphasizes one major thing: the EU must stay free of undue political and economic influence from the outside. An open debate about the actions being taken by European leaders is an asset, not an obstacle, as it helps make the right decisions. At the same time, there is no doubt that the EU must become better at strategically communicating all of its actions, in Europe and abroad while continuing to fight external disinformation, fake news, and cyberattacks.
In the Parliament’s latest resolution of 17 April on the COVID-19 pandemic, it urged the European Commission to counter aggressive Russian and Chinese propaganda efforts that are exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic to undermine the EU and sow mistrust in the local population towards the European Union. To counter negative narratives, it is particularly important to communicate about the EU’s financial, technical, and medical support in response to the pandemic, both between EU countries and to our other partner, among them China.
Goals in the simulation
• Representatives of different political groups will have to engage in debates that reflect their political position.
• Come up with their own position paper that will be debated with the other EU institutions.
The President is elected for a renewable term of two and a half years, i.e. half the lifetime of a Parliament. The President has two main Roles:
Support
• High solidarity between member states, especially those in need;
• Strengthening the EU’s role in global health.
• Mitigating the further spreading of the virus as a precondition for a lasting economic recovery.
• Public health and a strong economy are seen as mutually dependent.
• Investment in future economic prosperity.
• Family, improvements in education and health.
• Preserving a healthy environment.
• Pay particular attention to disadvantaged communities.
Red lines
• The avoidance of protectionism, and coordination of fiscal and monetary policies.
• The decrease of transparency of the measures, even at the cost of efficiency (We must always be transparent on both intra-institutional level, but also in our relationship with the European citizens).
• Increasing the dependence of the EU on other actors.
• Reject all national bans on the export of medicine and medical equipment to the other EU Member States.
Support
• Recognizes the important role European militaries are playing in assisting civilian authorities to contain the spread of the coronavirus and aid the infected.
• Stop the spread of fake news about the COVID-19 crisis by third countries with political and economic motives.
• The implementation of measures that ensure adequate protection and coordination of national border measures, as seasonal workers are especially vulnerable and essential for key economic sectors and must be guaranteed equal treatment and protection with their local counterparts in the context of COVID-19.
• An assessment of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic has on women and girls – from an increase in domestic violence to women in frontline healthcare jobs, and women charged with unequal sharing of care at home, to the problem ofaccess to sexualand reproductive rights and the discussion for appropriate measures to combat the vulnerable groups.
Red lines
• To mitigate the effects of the growing rule of law crisis at hand, and to devise a comprehensive exit strategy from the pandemic, while conditioning receiving the aid with the uphold of the rule of law by the member states;
• Prioritizing the adoption of pending legislation to strengthen democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental rights;
• Respecting the key principles of necessity and proportionality, so that policies should never go beyond what is strictly necessary, to achieve the goal of stopping the spread of the virus.
• Democracy, individual rights, and the rule of law are non-negotiable - the European Union needs to adopt a comprehensive and concrete Crisis Action Plan to tackle the profound rule of law crisis, as such It is imperative that the lockdown exit strategy explicitly includes the rule of law aspects, to make sure that exceptional powers are wound down, and normal checks and balances restored;
Support
● Welcome and encourage the initiatives and creative solutions from organised civil society across the EU which are helping our societies to cope with our new daily reality, as such they encourage hearing from representatives of the civil society.
● Demand financial assistance to those Member States that are most severely affected, through grants and low-interest loans without any politically dangerous conditionality.
● Urge the Member States and the EU to coordinate in order to foresee strong measures to prevent massive job losses and to stabilize the income of workers affected particularly the most vulnerable.
● Support other countries affected by COVID-19.
Red lines
● Strongly oppose all attempts at the mass collecting of personal data, be it by private or public institutions.
● Gravely alarmed by the unilateralactions of certain EU governments particularly with regard to the emergency measures and any restriction to fundamental and human rights must be as limited as possible in its duration, and in any case effective, but not disproportionate.
● The concern of planetary boundaries cannot be dismissed or suspended in this crisis;
● The fight against climate change and biodiversity loss will not be put on hold,as this situation urgently calls for an EU-wide Green Recovery Investment Package that goes beyond the current Sustainable Investment Plan in terms of ambition.
The countries that play a role in this simulation are Germany, Hungary, and Portugal.
The Council of the European Union and the European Council are the only EU institutions that are explicitly intergovernmental forums whose attendees express and represent the position of their member state’s executive, be they ambassadors, ministers, or heads of state/government. The EU’s legislative authority is divided between the Council, the Parliament, and the Commission.
The primary purpose of the Council is to act as one of two vetoing bodies of the EU’s legislative branch, the other being the European Parliament. Together they serve to amend, approve, or disapprove the proposals of the European Commission, which has the sole power to propose laws.
What does the Council do?
• negotiates and adopts EU laws, together with the European Parliament, based on proposals from the European Commission
• coordinates EU countries’ policies
• develops the EU’s foreign & security policy
All discussions and votes take place publicly and in order to be passed, decisions usually require a qualified majority.
Objectives
• Each state representative will be provided with information on how the country had been affected by the crisis;
• You will have to negotiate, based on your interests, with the other member states, as well as to engage with lobbyists. As you know, many lobbyists will try and persuade you to back their agenda up and to forward some of their interests at the negotiation table. It is up to you to decide whether you want to support them or not;
• You will have to come up with a common position paper.
• While your primary goal is to solve this crisis, your loyalties are towards your country.
Compared to many other countries, Germany has managed the COVID-19 crisis well, owing to its properly funded health system, technological edge, and decisive leadership. But beyond any unique feature of the German system is something that all countries can replicate: building public trust.
There were at least three reasons why Germany was at the forefront of the covid-19 crisis. First, the German health-care system was in good shape going into the crisis; everyone has had full access to medical care. This is a of a system that was built over the course of many governments. With an excellent network of general practitioners available to deal with milder COVID-19 cases, hospitals have been able to focus on the more severely ill. Second, Germany was not the first country to be hit by the virus, and thus had time to prepare. While we have always kept a relatively large number of hospital beds available, particularly in intensive-care units, and also took the COVID-19 threat seriously from the beginning. Third, Germany is home to many laboratories that can test for the virus, and to many distinguished researchers in the field, which helps to explain why the first rapid COVID-19 test and Pfizer the first vaccine against COVID-19 were developed here.
The country has not been sheltered from threats related to COVID-19. Increasingly, the German society is currently exposed to COVID-19 deniers and radical far-right groups projecting their threats at politicians, virologists and journalists. On top of that, police had to scatter multiple times throughout the pandemic, thousands of protesters angry about coronavirus restrictions. Civil unrest and increasing high demands for more relaxed measures are social realities that pressure the German decision-making apparatus more and more.
In Europe, Germany has emerged as the epicentre of the anti-lockdown movement, which has attracted an eclectic mix of young and old, far-right extremists, Covid-19 sceptics, anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists. Calling themselves “lateral thinkers”, they are part of a global phenomenon of those who see themselves as defenders of individual freedoms as they eschew masks and defy social distancing measures to congregate en masse for the cause.
Germany vs. fake news
• Germany has declared war on the trend of fake news. NGOs (such as Correctiv, a non-profit research centre), together with the DPA (one of Germany’s largest news agency) supported Facebook with fact checking. This is because the algorithms used in social media generate and reinforce echo chambers in which fake news can spread rapidly. Facebook thus provides the fact checkers with an internal list of potentially-fake news and reported posts that is then investigated.
• Facebook is seen in Germany, due in part to international developments, as one of the main sources of fake news.
• With the COVID-19 crisis sparking uncertainty, conspiracy theories are booming in Germany. Right-wing activists in particular are trying to stir up hatred against politicians and the democratic system. Conspiracy theorists claim there is a small group of elites pulling the strings behind the scenes, and that these elites are conspiring against the public, against everyday people. The fact that there are regular reports about abuse of power and misconduct by politicians and other powerful people plays into their hands. Media outlets that spread such theories are anything but naive about what they’re doing. Platforms like Russia Today Germany or the right-wing magazine Compact carry out targeted propaganda.
Priorities
These priorities are initial suggestions. Be flexible and think of additional priorities in line with the country you are representing.
• Create an integrated European strategy to combat the spread of misinformation, disinformation and fake news, taking a hard-stance against perpetratos outside the European Union.
• Improve the European technological infrastructure in the fight against fake news, at the expense of atlernative national options.
While the COVID-19 has affected every country, there has been a country that was particularly hit: Portugal. Nearly half of Portugal’s COVID deaths were reported in January, and the country’s health system is on the brink of collapse. Overwhelmed, the government has now appealed for international help. Several European nations, including Germany have stepped in to help.
The so-called UK variant (B117) has been increasingly detected in Portugal in recent weeks, which may have added to the perfect storm of factors that have led to the record-breaking numbers we now see. This variant is more transmissible, and perhaps also more lethal.
Although the epidemic is concentrated in the north, around the city of Porto, Portugal’s centralized system of government allowed for rapid nationwide measures rather than the piecemeal regional action adopted elsewhere. The political solidarity was maintained as government took measures such as fast-tracking all residency requests from migrants and asylum seekers to give them access to health care and social security; and granting early release to over 10 percent of inmates to reduce the risk of contagion in prisons.
Portugal is currently the president of the Council of the EU. The success of the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 and achieving an economic and social recovery based on the digital and climate transitions are the major challenges for the Portuguese Council Presidency, stated Prime Minister Costa, whilst urging members states to work closely together to achieve these goals. International solidarity will also be key to vanquish the virus, he added.
Portugal vs. fake news
• In early July, Facebook public policy director Andy O’Connell stated in parliament that the social network was “exploring ways to engage fact checkers” in Portugal, in addition to the Observer’s partnership. This program is “aligned with Facebook’s three-part structure to improve the quality and authenticity of content in the ‘News Feed’: Facebook removes accounts and content that violates community standards or advertising policies; reduces distribution. Fake news and untruthful content like ‘clickbait’ [strategy to increase internet traffic], and informs people by giving them more context in the ‘posts’ they see,”says the social network.
• In Portugal, there were widely circulated voice messages, fake news and falsified documents suggesting that the government is downplaying the number of cases. The messages are constantly challenging the authority and credibility of the officials.
• For the Council Presidency, Portugal defends the importance of regulating online social networks.
Priorities
These priorities are initial suggestions. Be flexible and think of additional priorities in line with the country you are representing.
• As the current President of the Council of the European Union, Portugal needs to act as a mediating force between the different national interests, as well as between the different EU institutions. Therefore, a priority of Portugal would be to avoid tensions escalating between countries with rival objectives in the field of combating fake news.
• Additionally, Portugal, given its current role, would like to enhance the resilience of the EU in the face of fake news; in order to achieve this level of resilience, Portugal should push for a more comprehensive approach to fake news, more detailed and targeted to the new digital threats.
Portugal Presidency of the Council of the European Union Council
The presidency of the Council rotates among the EU member states every 6 months. Portugal has the current Presidency of the Council. The presidency is responsible for driving forward the Council’s work on EU legislation, ensuring the continuity of the EU agenda and cooperation among member states. To do this, the presidency must act as an honest and neutral broker.
The presidency has two main tasks:
Planning and chairing meetings in the Council and its preparatory bodies. The presidency chairs the meetings of the Council. The presidency ensures that discussions are conducted properly. What this means in practice, is that the Portuguese representative will also be the acting Chairperson (or Chair) for the Council throughout the simulation. It will play the role of a ‘mediator’- looking to achieve an alignment between the member states by facilitating compromises between the opposing positions held by the member states.
Representing the Council in relations with the other EU institutions: The presidency represents the Council in relations with the other EU institutions, particularly with the Commission and the European Parliament. Its role is to try and reach agreement on legislative files through trialogues, informal negotiation meetings and Conciliation Committee meetings. This means that in official interinstitutional meetings, the presidency will act as the spokesperson of the Commission.
The COVID-19 pandemic hit Hungary at a unique moment in the evolution of the current political regime. Since coming to power in 2010, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government has sought to build a new political system that he calls “illiberal” democracy.
Hungary’s maligned single party government responded inefficiently to the covid-19 pandemic. With a collapsing healthcare system, its defective strategies and mishandling of the first wave led to an overcrowding of hospitals. Given the pressing circumstances, Hungary has become the first European Union member to start using Russia’s Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine and hopes to deploy China’s Sinopharm vaccine soon, despite neither having received approval from the EU’s medicines regulator.
Since early March 2020, the government has shifted gears. Using the fight against the virus as pretext and under the cover of the pandemic-focused public attention, Prime Minister Orbán has further concentrated power. Some include the governmental introduced new laws that:
• Allowed indefinite rule by decree on matters related to the virus broadly defined
• Further eroded the transparency of public spending
• Banned the previously allowed official change of gender
• Cut 2020 public funding for parties into half, which hurts opposition parties enormously
• Arrested some local opposition figures with the (false) charges of “fearmongering” and “posting fake news”.
Hungary vs Fake News
• A package of pandemic-related laws passed by the Hungarian Parliament. They gave the government power to rule by decree indefinitely, bypassing normal parliamentary procedures. Some fear the laws, known as the Authorization Act, could be used to silence critical media under the pretext of limiting the spread of fake news. The act allows prison terms of one to five years for those who “spread falsehoods or distorted facts” that could alarm the public. Distributing information that “inhibits the successful defense” against the pandemic is also punishable by five-year prison terms.
• The EU, which has repeatedly criticized Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s attempts to tighten control on the media and judiciary, condemned the act as “incompatible with European values,” and the broad language in the emergency measures caused concern over their potential scope.
• In April, the Hungarian authorities launched an online “fake news monitor” to debunk false statements about the coronavirus pandemic. Many of the items featured come from opposition politicians or articles by government-critical news organizations.
Priorities
These priorities are initial suggestions. Be flexible and think of additional priorities in line with the country you are representing.
• Assure the supply of vaccines for the Hungarian population. To support this, Hungary must keep a good relationship with Russia and China, which are potential providers of extra vaccine doses.
• Maintain its law against the spread of fake news which does not clearly define what false information is. Completely oppose narrow definitions and policies that would inhibit Hungary to continue to define and broadly prosecute the perpetrators of ‘fake news’, as assessed by the Hungarian authorities.
Lobby groups are first and foremost trying to attain their policy objectives, by establishing a framework that works best for their interest groups (policy attainment) or policy prevention ( when they seek to get rid of policies or clauses that may harm the activity of their company or field). If the situation asks for aggressive moves, lobbying groups seek to make use of the media to promote the cause they are campaigning for, to apply more pressure on the EU Institutions;
Lobby groups have the following powers in this simulation :
1. INFORMATION : know who is working on which proposals, get “leaked” Documents by arranging meetings with individual experts, MEPs, or state representatives; people;
2. ACCESS : arrange meetings, exchanges messages with the key stakeholders.
3. INPUT : know what you want to say, with clear priorities, and present it in meetings. You have the right to participate in Impact Assessment Meetings held by the EU Commission.
4. ALLIES AND COMPETITORS : on one hand, it is more difficult to succeed on your own due to an asymmetry of information and a long chain of command, that can leave your company outside the information loop in the negotiation process. On the other hand, sometimes lobbying groups have to compete with each other for influence, policies that may benefit one, but may damage another. In that setting, lobbyist groups may choose to disclose full information one with each other, may choose to share partial information, or may choose to deceive and ignore the other lobbyist groups if they are direct competitors and sharing information would overwhelmingly change the benefits that the others‘ would gain by accessing new data;
The lobby group represents employers’ associations plus big companies like Google, Tik-Tok and Facebook, and pretty much any other mammoth in the tech industry. The clients are high profile from 35 European countries. They seek to study, encourage, and propose any action which may contribute to the lasting development of companies in Europe and to assure the survival of their social networks.
• You will have to come up with your own position paper, but also make sure that the other institutions take into account your interests when drafting their own position papers.
• Immediately begin an intensive lobbying campaign requesting that all EU initiatives not directly linked to the health and economic crisis are put on hold;
• Oppose the policy points that might require industry to change behaviour, delaying the implementation of the Digital Services Act package;
• Fighting for the relaxation of the Code of Practice on Disinformation to fight fake news;
• Promising to foster truth and transparency in ads, enforce policies against false identities and bots, in exchange for not prioritizing “authoritative” information when relevant;
• Limited help to researchers looking into disinformation campaigns, little exchange to private data in these regards;
• Protect big clientele countries outside Europe by shifting the blame and pointing in a different direction.
• This company has a history of arranging successful meetings with DG CONNECT, and it may be a good starting point to try and persuade one or more of the Commission’s experts about their interests;
• Members of the EPP are eager to listen to innovative ideas about boosting the economy in a post-crisis scenario. This may be a good opportunity for this lobbyist company to work out something that the EPP members seek, in exchange for obtaining support for some of the company‘s interests.
• The lobbying clients are from different member state countries! Maybe one of the representatives of a country in the Council will be willing to include on their agenda some of the objectives that the lobbyists have, in exchange for a massive investment in their country?
Being such a big company, the lobbying budget is proportional to their needs: EUR 550,000 . The budget can be spent on different projects (financing some campaigns, investing them in different goods if there is a shortage or strategically using them for meetings). Beware! This budget is fixed and must be used with caution, to further the goals of the clients. If you don’t manage to fulfil the goals, the lobbying company will lose its credibility, clients and will go bankrupt the following year. You can find the options of spending your budget under the section: Lobbying Menu.
Reviewed by the current experts in Directorate-General CONNECT
The Commission defines define “Disinformation” as “verifiably false or misleading information” which, cumulatively,
“Is created, presented and disseminated for economic gain or to intentionally deceive the public”; and
“May cause public harm”, intended as “threats to democratic political and policymaking processes as well as public goods such as the protection of EU citizens’ health, the environment or security”.
The notion of “Disinformation” does not include misleading advertising, reporting errors, satire and parody, or clearly identified partisan news and commentary, and is without prejudice to binding legal obligations, self-regulatory advertising codes, and standards regarding misleading advertising.
The purpose of this Code is to identify the actions that Signatories could put in place in order to address the challenges related to “Disinformation”
In line with the Commission’s Communication, the Signatories of the Code of Practice recognise the importance of efforts to:
Include safeguards against Disinformation;
Improve the scrutiny of advertisement placements to reduce revenues of the purveyors of disinformation;
Ensure transparency about political and issue-based advertising, also with a view to enabling users to understand why they have been targeted by a given advertisement;
Dilute the visibility of disinformation by improving the findability of trustworthy content. The Signatories agree to cooperate with the European Commission in assessing the reporting on the functioning of the Code.
The European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO) is a project that aims at creating and supporting the work of an independent multidisciplinary community capable of contributing to a deeper understanding of the disinformation phenomenon and to increase societal resilience to it.
It currently operates on 5 pillars. The experts are trying to enlarge and broaden the scope and mechanisms of this project that aims at creating and supporting the work of an independent multidisciplinary community capable of contributing to a deeper understanding of the disinformation phenomenon and to increase societal resilience to it.
Mapping of fact-checking organisations in Europe and supporting them by fostering joint and cross-border activities and dedicated training modules.
Mapping, supporting and coordinating of research activities on disinformation at the European level, including the creation and regular update of a global repository of peer-reviewed scientific articles on disinformation.
Building a public portal providing media practitioners, teachers and citizens with information and materials aimed at increasing awareness, building resilience to online disinformation and supporting media literacy campaigns.
Design a framework to ensure secure and privacy-protected access to platforms’ data for academic researchers working to better understand disinformation.
Support public authorities in the monitoring of the policies put in place by online platforms to limit the spread and the impact of disinformation
For the first time, a common set of rules on intermediaries’ obligations and accountability across the single market will open up new opportunities to provide digital services across borders, while ensuring a high level of protection to all users, no matter where they live in the EU.
This means concretely:
· transparency measures for online platforms on a variety of issues, including on the algorithms used for recommendations · oversight structure to address the complexity of the online space: EU countries will have the primary role, supported by a new European Board for Digital Services; for very large platforms, enhanced supervision and enforcement by the Commission
Whereas:
An area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with the purpose of obtaining an economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children.
In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross-border response in the online environment. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or
Standing up to challenges to our democratic systems from rising extremism and perceived distance between people and politicians, the Action Plan sets out measures to promote free and fair elections, strengthen media freedom and counter disinformation.
Digitalisation enabled new ways to finance political actors from uncontrolled sources, cyber-attacks can target critical electoral infrastructure, journalists face online harassment and hate speech, and false information and polarising messages spread rapidly through on social media, also by coordinated disinformation campaigns. The impact of some of these steps is amplified by the use of opaque algorithms controlled by widely used communication platforms.
Measures:
• Develop the EU’s toolbox for countering foreign interference and influence operations, including new instruments that allow imposing costs on perpetrators, as well as strengthening the EEAS strategic communication activities and taskforces • Develop a common framework and methodology for collecting systematic evidence on foreign interference and a structural dialogue with civil society, private industry actors and other relevant stakeholders to regularly review the threat situation • Increase support and funding for and diversifying initiatives, including by civil society organisations, to promote media literacy and help citizens identify disinformation, within the EU and beyond
Socialists and Democrats
Support
• Launch a temporary European minimum income scheme to protect all types of workers, self-employed and small businesses, including in particular workers and self-employed in precarious forms of work and low-income families.
• Ensure reliable food supplies from agriculture, fisheries, and food business during and beyond the immediate health crisis, safeguarding their continued production and barrier-free transport across the Single Market.
• A robust and well-financed regional and cohesion policy as a vital tool to support a cohesive economic and social recovery across the whole EU. This should be accompanied by the simplification of the procedures to access funds.
• Support other countries affected by the COVID-19;
• Trade is one of the many tools that you can use to raise social, labor, and environmental standards worldwide and trade must put people first.
Red lines
• No excuse for an indefinite lockdown of democracy, condemning undemocratic domestic political interests with public health concerns as a cover;
• COVID-19 can be no excuse to implement or delay the urgent policies that we had already agreed on, such as the Green Deal, the Social Pillar, or gender mainstreaming;
• Democracy and the rule of law must be fully observed, along with citizens’ rights and privacy;