#publicsphere - AlgorithmWatch

Ravi Sharma | Unsplash

Position, 30 March 2022

DSA trilogues in the endgame: Policymakers must prioritize platform transparency

With the trilogue negotiations entering their final phase, key issues remain at stake that will determine the final text of the Digital Services Act (DSA). In this policy paper, we urge EU negotiators to prioritize issues that are central to the DSA’s accountability structure – including third-party data access for public scrutiny, independent audits, and increased transparency for online advertisements.

George Pagan | unsplash

Position, 22 March 2022

Joint Civil Society Briefing for the Digital Services Act Trilogues

The Digital Services Act (DSA) promises greater accountability for big tech platforms and a safer and more transparent online environment for all. At the moment, the Council of the EU, the European Parliament and the European Commission are negotiating the final version of the text. In a joint briefing paper compiled with 11 other civil society organizations, we define key priorities for these so-called trilogue negotiations.

Blog, 14 March 2022

DataSkop: simulating the dynamics of recommender systems

Several thousands of supporters donated their YouTube profile data on our platform DataSkop. We have developed a simulator that is designed to demonstrate basic principles of recommendation algorithms such as YouTube's.

Position, 1 March 2022

AlgorithmWatch signs statement on ban of predictive policing in the Artificial Intelligence Act

Today, 1st March 2022, AlgorithmWatch along with Fair Trials, European Digital Rights (EDRi) and 38 civil society organisations launched a collective statement to call on the EU to ban predictive policing systems in the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA).

Mathias P.R. Reding | Unsplash

Position, 28 February 2022

Human rights and activities of tech companies: Governments must act

Discrimination and violations of rights to equal treatment by the law – these are among the risks to human rights posed by the development and use of algorithmic systems by technology companies. In our submission to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) we argue that states have a duty to protect citizens from these risks.

Gianluca Cinnante | Unsplash

Position, 24 February 2022

Joint Statement on Stakeholder Inclusion in the Code of Practice on Disinformation Revision Process

The Code of Practice on Disinformation is currently being revised to update commitments by platforms and industry to tackle the problem of online disinformation. In a joint statement with Access Now, Civil Liberties Union for Europe, and European Digital Rights (EDRi), we express our concerns over the lack of inclusion of third-party stakeholders in the revision process.

Blog, 7 February 2022

Don’t smile for the camera – stop automated facial recognition!

Join the cause and spread the word about the dangers of biometric surveillance by ordering one of our “Don’t smile for the camera” tote bags for free.

Gareth Harrison ǀ Unsplash

Story, 4 February 2022

Costly birthplace: discriminating insurance practice

Two residents in Rome with exactly the same driving history, car, age, profession, and number of years owning a driving license may be charged a different price when purchasing car insurance. Why? Because of their place of birth, according to a recent study.

Maarten van den Heuvel | Unsplash

Blog, 27 January 2022

EU Parliament approves its negotiating position on the DSA

The plenary vote establishes the European Parliament's position ahead of the trilogue negotiations with the Council of the EU and the Commission, which will start next week. Despite progress by the Parliament on issues like platform transparency, it is far from guaranteed that this progress will be enshrined in the final law.

Susan Q Yin ǀ Unsplash

Publication, 27 January 2022

Data altruism: how the EU is screwing up a good idea

In a new AlgorithmWatch discussion paper, data regulation expert Winfried Veil argues that the Data Governance Act is not only annoyingly bureaucratic, but a missed opportunity to breathe life into the “Data for Good” idea.