Joint Committee on European Union Affairs díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 20 Mar 2024

European Elections 2024, Voting Rights and Combating Disinformation: Discussion (Resumed)

An Cathaoirleach

On behalf of the committee, I welcome Mr. Jeremy Godfrey, executive chair of Coimisiún na Meán. He is joined Ms Anne Marie Pollock, director of policy, and Ms Stephanie Comey, director of media literacy. Today's meeting will be a continuation of the discussion we have been having on the upcoming European elections, voting rights and, in particular, combating disinformation. The witnesses are very welcome. I thank them for attending.

Before we begin our formal engagement, there is the usual housekeeping note. If everyone will bear with me, I will rattle it off.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded damaging to the good name of a person or entity. If witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks.

Members are reminded of the long-standing practice to the effect that they should not comment, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or any official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I also remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present in the confines of Leinster House in order to participate in public meetings. If they are participating, I will ask them to confirm that they are within the precincts of Leinster House. That is for members attending remotely, some of whom can be seen listed on the screen.

I call on Mr. Godfrey to make his opening statement.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

Tá mé agus mo chomhghleacaithe anseo le bualadh leis an choiste inniu. I thank the committee for the invitation to meet with it today. I am the executive chairperson of Coimisiún na Meán and I am joined by Anne Marie Pollock, director of policy for democracy and fundamental rights, and Stephanie Comey, director of media literacy and user education.

This year has been called the year of democracy, with over half of the world’s population expected to vote in elections in 2024. In Ireland, as well as European elections, we have local elections, an election for the directly elected mayor of Limerick and at least three referendums.

Coimisiún na Meán’s purpose is to ensure a thriving, diverse, creative, trusted and safe media landscape. In the context of elections, this means a media landscape that enables a variety of voices and opinions to be heard and that supports the agency of voters to make a free and informed choice. Disinformation and misinformation are significant societal challenges and a risk to the democratic process. While societal challenges require cross-societal responses, Coimisiún na Meán has several levers across its remit which can help to address disinformation and misinformation.

I will start with a brief overview of Coimisiún na Meán and then describe three aspects of our role in relation to combatting disinformation. The first aspect is our role, together with the European Commission and our counterparts in other member states, in combating online misinformation and disinformation. The second is our role in promoting media literacy. The third is our role in promoting the provision of impartial, fair and objective information through broadcast news and current affairs and support for local journalism.

Coimisiún na Meán was established in March of last year. It took on the functions and staff of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. Our expanded remit covers broadcasting and on-demand regulation, media development and online safety. Broadcasting and on-demand regulation and media development are governed by the relevant sections of the Broadcasting Act 2009. Our online safety framework has three main components, namely the EU terrorist content online regulation, the EU Digital Services Act and the online safety code, which we are developing following public consultation. Coimisiún na Meán had approximately 40 staff when it was established, and we aim to reach approximately 160 staff by the middle of the year. We have sought approval to increase staff numbers to around 250.

Last month, we opened our user contact centre. We advise members of the public who have concerns about online or broadcast content about their rights and how to raise their concerns with the platform or broadcaster concerned. We also accept formal complaints if a user considers that a platform or broadcaster is in breach of a regulatory obligation. The contact centre will play a crucial role in gathering information on the types of illegal and harmful content people are encountering online, which will allow us to better combat systemic issues relating to online platforms. It is important to stress that our role is to supervise how platforms comply with their obligations at a systemic level. These obligations include acting on reports of illegal content and diligently enforcing their own rules about what they do or do not allow on their services.

It is also worth setting out what we do not do. We do not act as a content moderator nor do we resolve disputes about whether particular items of content are illegal or represent misinformation. We are not a censor. We do not consider complaints about individuals nor do we take action against them.

The Digital Services Act, DSA, places an obligation on very large online platforms, VLOPs, and very large online search engines, VLOSEs, to assess a number of risks that activity on their platforms can pose and to take steps to mitigate those risks. This specifically includes risks to electoral integrity and civic discourse. VLOPs are platforms with more than 45 million average monthly users in the EU. They include major social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, TikTok, X and YouTube, that have their EU headquarters in Ireland. VLOSEs include Google Search and Bing, which also have headquarters in Ireland.

The European Commission is responsible for enforcing the risk assessment and mitigation obligations of VLOPs and VLOSEs. Coimisiún na Meán is the digital services co-ordinator, DSC, for Ireland. Because we are the DSC in the location in which these entities are established, we work closely with the European Commission in respect of its task in this regard. The European Commission has recently consulted on guidelines about the mitigation measures that these services are recommended to take in regard to electoral integrity. These guidelines are expected to be finalised by Easter. The aim is to establish an electoral integrity ecosystem involving the platforms, civil society groups and electoral authorities, with DSCs playing a co-ordinating role in each member state and the European Commission as the ultimate enforcer. While the guidelines are intended to apply to all elections across the EU, the forthcoming European Parliament election will be the first time they will be applied.

The draft guidelines are comprehensive. It might be helpful to give a flavour of some the actions that VLOPs and VLOSEs are expected to take. For example, platforms are recommended to: set up an internal team before each electoral period that is supposed to include country-specific expertise; point users to official sources of information about the electoral process, which in Ireland is the Electoral Commission; collaborate with independent fact-checking organisations that identify disinformation, add labels to information provided by fact checkers and integrate their content into user feeds to increase their impact; provide tools to help users assess the trustworthiness of information sources; demonetise disinformation content and limit its virality by adding warning labels and deprioritising it in recommender-system algorithms; label political advertising and maintain a public repository of political ads and ensure that influencers declare if their content is paid political advertising; have and enforce rules against impersonation of candidates; act against content that incites violence or hatred and thus discourages members of particular groups from participating in political activity; ensure that artificial intelligence, AI, and manipulated content such as deepfakes are distinguishable for users; monitor the performance of AI provided information; and collaborate with researchers and conduct reviews of the effectiveness of mitigation measures after each election.

The guidelines are careful to stress that the aim is to protect the integrity of the electoral process from disinformation and manipulation and to support the exercise of liberty of expression and robust political debate. We are working with the European Commission and our counterparts in other member states about how DSCs will operationalise their co-ordination role. We have already engaged with the Electoral Commission in this regard and will reach out to other stakeholders once the guidelines are finalised.

Media literacy can play a significant role in the context of elections, by ensuring that people can critically understand and interact with media and make informed choices about what they see, read and share online. We see media literacy as a longer-term effort that can help mitigate the impact of disinformation and misinformation, with our efforts continuing outside of election times. Coimisiún na Meán is the main facilitator of Media Literacy Ireland. Last year, we supported the Be Media Smart campaign that encourages people to stop, think and check that the information they are getting is accurate and reliable. We are proud to support this campaign and to encourage people to critically assess media content, whether online or offline, which we believe will help to reduce the impact of disinformation and misinformation. In line with our role under the DSA, we are running a "Spot It. Flag It. Stop It." public awareness campaign to inform people of their rights under the DSA and to encourage online users to report content that they believe is illegal directly to the platforms where they saw it.

Coimisiún na Meán is also a member of the European Platform of Regulatory Authorities, which is aimed at exchanging ideas and best practices regarding media literacy on a pan-European basis.

Separately, Coimisiún na Meán is represented on the European Commission’s media literacy expert group, which meets quarterly to identify, document and extend good practices in the field of media literacy. Beyond combating misinformation and disinformation, we believe that delivering media literacy initiatives in Ireland is crucial to ensuring that prospective voters know their rights and can understand the issues at play during elections and referendums.

Coimisiún na Meán has assumed the former BAI’s role in broadcast regulation. This includes our guidelines for the broadcast coverage of elections and referendums. The guidelines underline the importance of fairness, objectivity and impartiality in news and current affairs. High-quality public service media also acts as an effective bulwark against the spread of disinformation, particularly through the provision of impartial and high-quality news. Our codes apply both to the public service media organisations, namely, RTÉ and TG4, and to licensed TV and radio broadcasters. Within the coming weeks, we will launch a consultation on the design of two schemes to support local journalism; one focused on local democracy, including the activities of local councils and one on local court reporting. These schemes should expand information available that will be of use to voters, particularly in local elections.

Finally, since 2023 Coimisiún na Meán has served on the national counter disinformation strategy, NCDS, working group, supported by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. The development of a national counter disinformation strategy was a key recommendation of the Future of Media Commission. In the context of the upcoming European elections, we have an important role in regulating broadcasters, ensuring that online platforms live up to their obligations and in promoting media literacy for the public. We are committed to a diverse, safe and thriving media landscape in Ireland, during the European elections and beyond.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Godfrey for a comprehensive opening statement.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

I thank Mr. Godfrey and his team. Our focus is on upholding the integrity of the upcoming elections and in particular, as the European affairs committee, of the European elections and that was why the witnesses were invited in. I will ask a number of questions on the presentation that Mr. Godfrey has given. I refer to the role of Coimisiún na Meán that he has set out, namely, combating online misinformation and disinformation and promoting impartial fair, objective information. On the first of those, he went on to say the coimisiún does not have a role in moderating content, resolving disputes or on whether particular items of content are illegal or represent misinformation. The organisation is not a censor and does not consider complaints about individuals. How is the objective aligned with the coimisiún's capacity? How does the organisation combat misinformation and disinformation if it has no role in determining what is misinformation or disinformation?

Second, in truth the speed of getting online platforms to remove patent falsehoods is critical in terms of an election. One may recall the comment made by a former American president that while he knew what he had said was untrue, he just wanted to hear the expletive deny it. My basic point is there is no point in having it all rectified after an election date. In terms of speed, what role does the coimisiún see itself having in that? As regards the guidelines as set out that are being finalised at present, are they enforceable and if so, by whom? When they are finalised and distributed, who is going to do that enforcement?

As for my final question, I hope I do not sound cynical but on the notion of Be Smart Media and Media Literacy Ireland telling people almost to go to a trusted trader, that particular horse has well bolted. I am not sure that I got the essence of whether there is an understanding - I would be interested in Mr. Godfrey's view on it - but the reality on the ground now is one where, for example, I would describe X as a sewer. You cannot post an event that you were at or anything without knowing that the most vile and awful of things will descend upon you. It is having an impact. Obviously we could hear in very recent hours an individual who is not standing in the next election make a determination on that. As for getting people to go into elections if that is now the new milieu, which is much more fundamental to the preservation of our democracy, it probably is an impossible task but I would hope there is an understanding of the serious undermining of normal discourse on social media that has an enormous potential to destroy functioning democracy in my judgment and I do not think that is an overstatement.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I will answer the Deputy's questions. I might ask Ms Comey to talk about media literacy, which we do not see as an overnight silver bullet, but it can help. It is something that requires a lot of effort over a long time -----

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Sorry, in case my point is misunderstood, the people are quite literate. There is a new paradigm where people want to believe certain things and they are reinforced by what they listen to. It is then a world of Trumpian alternative truths.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

To run through some of the Deputy's questions, he asked about our role and how, if we are not the judge of every piece of content online and if we are not making decisions, that can make a difference. The important thing is that it is the platforms that need to up their game. On foot of the Digital Services Act and the establishment of Coimisiún na Meán, we are moving from an era of self-regulation where platforms could decide for themselves what they wanted to do to one of statutory regulation, where they have obligations. It is about getting the platforms systemically to address misinformation and disinformation so that they are the ones who identify it and they are the ones with trusted fact checkers who can point out things that are incorrect and they are the ones that can label the information and direct people towards good sources of information. It is very important that we do not interfere with legitimate political expression or with legitimate political debate. It is right that we are not the censors ourselves. These guidelines are about the oversight of what platforms are doing. It is what the platforms are supposed to do in order to deal with misinformation and disinformation. I can see the Deputy shaking his head-----

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Is that not already hopeless? Does Mr. Godfrey think it is working now?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

It has not worked in the past, which is the reason we have these new laws. The Digital Services Act came into force and became fully applicable on 17 February this year. Our role came into force on that date. I do not want to create the impression that things are going to be suddenly marvellous but is about getting the platforms to do better. That is not something which we can say will happen overnight but the guidelines that I talked about are very good and comprehensive. If the platforms follow them, they will make a difference. The Deputy asked whether they are enforceable and who will enforce them. The guidelines are issued under the Digital Services Act as expectations from the European Commission as to how the big platforms will deliver on their obligation to mitigate the risks to electoral integrity and civic discourse. The enforcement of that obligation is one for the European Commission. It is its exclusive competence and it applies not just to the platforms in Ireland. It also applies to Snapchat, the European headquarters of which is in the Netherlands and to Telegram, the European headquarters of which is in Belgium.

That is why this is important. It should be a pan-European approach. As the Deputy said, any enforcement action will follow the elections. However, he prospect of the enforcement action should be something that creates an incentive for the platforms to do better on matters such as the speed at which they remove content and the speed at which they act. In the guidelines, that is highlighted as an important aspect.

The Deputy also talked about the severe impact that online discourse, hate and threats have on participation in political life. That is certainly very severe. It particularly affects women in politics and people from minority groups. Last year, I gave evidence to the task force on safer participation in public life. It is quite clear that is an issue. One of the things we highlighted is that there is now, under the DSA, an obligation on the platforms to have a mechanism to allow people to flag content that is illegal. Some of the threats that female politicians get are arguably illegal under Irish and other law. The platforms not only must have a mechanism to flag that content but they have to act on those flags in a timely manner. Under the DSA, there is also a mechanism for trusted flaggers. We are keen to engage in that regard. One of the things we said to the task force on participation in public life was that groups that represent candidates or politicians might become trusted flaggers. A trusted flagger has a kind of fast lane. When it raises a concern or flags something on the platforms, they have to prioritise the issue and deal with it more quickly.

In answer to the Deputy's general question, things are bad. Laws and regulation obligations can make things better. Those will not be overnight panaceas and will take time. The guidelines I talked about are a very good starting point. It is going to be important for the platforms to do what they need to do and to engage with the civil society groups, to fact check and to engage with electoral authorities. Our role is to co-ordinate that locally and to assist the European Commission in any enforcement action or evaluation and enforcement it might wish to take. I take the Deputy's point that this is a serious problem. We have finally got some laws and regulation obligations to address it. We will be moving from a situation where a big improvement is needed in what the platforms do. We hope we will see an improvement for the European elections and further improvements beyond. I will ask Ms Comey to talk about media literacy.

Ms Stephanie Comey

I thank the Deputy for the question. I will start by briefly outlining what Media Literacy Ireland is. It is an informal alliance of volunteers who are working to deliver media literacy on the ground and to consider what strategic imperatives need to be met for media literacy in Ireland. It was established in 2017. It had 34 members then; it has over 300 now. Those members come from a vast range of sectors that includes broadcasting, the press, journalism, education, civil society and online platforms. It is very much a multi-stakeholder network. Dr. Eileen Culloty, who is the co-chair, was before the committee recently. She works with me and a co-ordinator on the steering group of Media Literacy Ireland.

The Be Media Smart campaign is the flagship initiative of Media Literacy Ireland. It is not just a public awareness campaign but goes much deeper. I do not have numbers for the committee because we are finalising the report but I would be very happy to share the information with the committee. We have worked on the ground with libraries over all over Ireland. We have worked with every single local and community radio station in Ireland. Those are very deeply trusted sources of media. They have reached out and provided editorial content and support. They have materials on their websites. We know the campaign has reached a high number of people. That is one measure. We also know because we have research to back it up that there has been a behavioural change in individuals and things they would have let pass or that they would complained about but not acted upon in the past are now being acted upon. Media literacy is a lifelong learning journey. It takes time and is not an issue that can be solved. However, I say with some confidence that the multistakeholder approach adopted by Ireland is working and delivering. It has been touted in the European Union and beyond as a strong model for co-operation on the ground. We believe this can work. It needs resources and time. Libraries are key partners because they are sources of knowledge and outreach on the ground. We will continue the work on that basis.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

The Deputy quoted an American politician. Another quote is that a lie goes around the world while the truth is putting on its boots. I will ask Ms Pollock to talk about the rapid response mechanism in the guidelines.

Ms Anne-Marie Pollock

I thank the Deputy. Mr. Godfrey mentioned the rapid response piece. These guidelines are comprehensive. They are still in draft form, which is important to underline, but they should be finalised, as Mr. Godfrey noted, around Easter. There are certain sections of the guidelines dedicated to election periods when timeliness is so key. Those guidelines suggest having an instant response mechanism in place. It is recommended for that to include senior leadership. In addition to the timely response, which is so important during an election, the guidelines also recommend a "follow the sun" model when working in this area. The model works across time zones, given the global nature of these platforms and services. This is in addition to the rapid response system that was established by the signatories under the code of practice for disinformation. That is certainly to the top of the mind in these guidelines.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I will follow on from Deputy Howlin. We are talking about a rapid response to misinformation and disinformation but that is not happening at this point. Mr. Godfrey has, in fairness, taken a bit of a hit from some of the characters online who have put him up as a hate figure. Unfortunately, that is the world we are in. When we are talking about misinformation and disinformation, I have listened to some of the arguments of some of the social media companies. I get some of them. There are things that are obviously facts and other things that are absolute lies. That can, therefore, be dealt with. Other things fall into a different set of circumstances. Anyone who has been watching anything about Irish politics in the past while will have seen numerous instances of people shouting and screaming at others. At some stages, they are shouting about traitors, speaking in general and expressing dislike. My fear about all this stuff is that it has a cumulative impact. The other thing is that Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, Meta in general, WhatsApp and all these companies are looking to make money. Therefore, it is going to be incredibly difficult to have any sort of rapid response system. Any of us might go on Facebook or TikTok because we are interested in a particular issue that may be happening in a constituency. Let us say the issue relates to the D Hotel in Drogheda and we look at some of the commentary in that regard. For the next couple of days that we are on Facebook, TikTok or wherever else, we will get a slew of craziness. In some cases, that will mean the meandering of deranged people speaking outside at such locations or in their own sitting rooms.

Some are their general opinions but there are mistruths, lies and all the rest. There is stuff they may believe that is absolutely wrong. It would take a long time to make complaints individually on all of that. I wish to ask about Coimisiún na Meán's engagement with social media companies. We can have all the rules and regulations but they will not work until we can in some way enforce this and they are up for it. The same algorithms that work for them from a business point of view work in selling bile, hate and absolute deranged idiocy. The fear is that when people see this, it becomes a hell of a lot more acceptable. One always worries about what the next step is. As everybody moves one step or what was not acceptable yesterday becomes acceptable, my fear is that the next thing is not just get your hands on me, it is literally assaulting someone or far worse. What is Coimisiún na Meán's engagement? The electoral commission was before the committee and its representatives said they had fairly good opening conversations with the social media companies but I have seen nothing change. Social media are an absolute sewer at this point. There will be nothing but mistruths, disinformation and misinformation the whole way right through an election. There is an element of David and Goliath, them being Goliath and Coimisiún na Meán not even having a slingshot.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I thank the Deputy. He spoke about there being commercial imperatives. Ultimately, non-compliance with the obligations can lead to substantial financial penalties. Moving from self-regulation to statutory regulation changes the incentives. That may take some time to play out. In the timeliness of taking down illegal hate speech - speech that incites violence and hatred against groups with protected characteristics, which is illegal speech - there is an obligation, when flagged, for the flags to be acted on and if it is flagged by a trusted flagger, for it to be prioritised in a timely manner. What is timely will depend on the context. During an election, timing may be quicker than outside of an election period, for example. One of Coimisiún na Meán's roles is as an enforcer of that obligation on social media companies. In the context of very big social media companies, it is a joint competence. The European Commission can take enforcement action, as can we.

The Deputy asked about our engagement with social media companies. As an organisation, we are coming out of our start-up phase but we are still not fully staffed. We established a platform supervision and investigations division. We have supervisors for all of those big platforms and they are building up their supervisory teams. We engage with them in the sense that it is our job to make sure we understand what they do and how they operate. We will start monitoring their compliance and gathering data about their compliance with obligations. If we are concerned that they are not complying, we can start a formal investigation. As I said, we have only had this role for just over a month so it is still early days. On our engagement so far with social media companies, it has been good in the sense that they talk to us. Engagement is not the same as compliance. We will be quite fearless in looking at whether they comply with their obligations inside or outside election periods. I should clarify that within the Digital Services Act, there is a raft of obligations on platforms. There are some specific to the very large platforms such as the risk assessment and mitigation about which I spoke. For those obligations, it is the European Commission's enforcement responsibility. There is a kind of collaboration approach as well. All the digital services co-ordinators will be able to gather evidence about how those services are experienced by people in their states. We, as the particular digital services co-ordinator where most of those platforms are based, have a greater role. Exactly how that will work is something we are still working out because it is so new. Everything the Deputy said about there being a problem is exactly the reason the Digital Services Act and the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act were passed. We are in the first weeks and months of bringing those pieces more to life. The guidelines about which I spoke are the first significant piece of expectation setting by the European Commission. We will see what impact that has on the European elections and whether that needs to be followed by enforcement action. There will be a kind of post-match review afterwards. All of that is important.

There is misinformation. It is as old as the hills for political debate to include contested statements; let us put it like that. Deputy Howlin gave one quote. We will never stop contested statements in political debate, including some that might be deliberately misleading, but social media has made that problem much worse. One is through the amplification of those statements and the other is through enabling what people call co-ordinated inauthentic behaviour. It is not just an individual saying something online or even just a political party; I am sure different political parties will often think their competitors may be-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

They are the bad guys, not us.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I could not possibly comment about that. There can be more covert inauthentic behaviour and risks of inauthentic and manipulative behaviour coming from overseas. Those are new in the online era and are quite serious risks to society. They are also things platforms are well placed to spot in the patterns of activity and to deal with. We are-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Starting.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

Yes. We are starting now. We hope to make a difference. If platforms do not abide by their obligations, they will face consequences.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

They will need to. In fairness, Coimisiún na Meán is taking on their algorithms, which are obviously how they make money, but they cause a lot of this issue and the amplification. How does it work regarding the European Commission's enforcement and Coimisiún na Meán's engagement with it? My fear is with a post-match analysis, the match is lost for a number of people.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We work closely with the European Commission. We have a good relationship. It has been at this for approximately six months longer than we have. It is a little bit further advanced. Some of the obligations it has been supervising have been in place for the past six months. It has had the first risk assessments from the major platforms. It has done its designations. It is also still building up its resources. How we operationalise what the working arrangements will be still needs to be worked out. There is a group called the European Board for Digital Services that consists of the Commission with all the digital service co-ordinators. We had our first meeting on 19 February. The first thing we decided to do was focus on elections and electoral integrity, particularly with the forthcoming European Parliament elections. That is the first piece of co-operation designed among us.

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy Haughey is next.

Deputy Seán Haughey

I thank Coimisiún na Meán for its presentations. Obviously it is a new organisation so is finding its feet and beginning to implement its aims and objectives. I wish Coimisiún na Meán well with that, backed up by the Digital Services Act and several other pieces of legislation. It has applied for new staff so presumably that will be forthcoming.

I will focus on disinformation which is our main brief in the context of the forthcoming elections to the European Parliament. As the witnesses mentioned, Dr. Eileen Culloty from DCU was before the committee as was the Electoral Commission and European Movement Ireland. Dr. Culloty spoke about foreign information, manipulation and interference, and domestic information manipulation. Has Coimisiún na Meán come across either in an Irish context, having regard to these two types of disinformation? Has Coimisiún na Meán had any complaints yet with regard to its brief? Is it open for complaints and what kinds of complaints is it receiving?

Dr. Culloty also spoke about the need to monitor ongoing narratives, platforms and actors. I am a bit pessimistic, to be honest. Like Deputy Howlin, I think the more we go into this, the more hopeless it seems. That is not to discourage the witnesses. I take on board what they have said. At least we have some sort of structure in place to deal with these matters.

Does Coimisiún na Meán have any role in fact-checking? I know journalists and NGOs can do that but it is quite a big undertaking. We have dealt with the need for speed, the time it takes to implement effective action and the need for a rapid response. I would be quite negative about that as well.

I have a specific question about the riots that took place in Dublin last November. There were the awful stabbings in Parnell Square but it is clear that social media platforms were utilised to spread far right hatred, disinformation and intolerance at that particular time. I read somewhere that Ireland was the first EU member state to activate the EU Digital Services Act protocol. Will the witness say something about that specific incident? It brings it home to us because that was a real case in point for Ireland as those riots took place and the role played by social media in that. Coimisiún na Meán is a relatively new organisation and maybe the Digital Services Act had not even been passed by the Oireachtas then but will the witnesses tell us about its interaction with the European Commission at that particular time?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

There are quite a few questions there.

Deputy Seán Haughey

Yes, I am sorry.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

The Deputy said it is a big task. Of course it is. We are not discouraged. Equally, we will not promise overnight results. In terms of foreign information, manipulation and interference, FIMI, and-----

An Cathaoirleach

I remind members there are legal proceedings pending in regard to the riots and what took place, so we should exercise an abundance of caution in what we say.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I thank the Cathaoirleach. That is a good warning. I think manipulation is a particular danger at election time. These are the first elections since Coimisiún na Meán was established, so not yet is the answer.

Deputy Seán Haughey

It is early days yet.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We will see. In terms of fact-checking, Coimisiún na Meán is not a fact-checker. There is one fact-checking organisation in Ireland - The Journal FactCheck - which is a member of the International Fact-Checking Network, the European Fact-Checking Standards Network and the European Digital Media Observatory. We are not the people who have accredited it but it has accreditation and it will be part of our role to make sure that during elections, the platforms understand The Journal FactCheck is an accredited fact-checker.

In terms of the riots, I will take care in what I have to say but I can tell the committee what our role was and how European Commission was involved. On the day of the stabbings, Coimisiún na Meán became aware of them through media reports around lunchtime. At this time, we had no formal powers and the Digital Services Act, DSA, had not become applicable to us at that point but we had already had engagement with the platforms. We alerted them to the stabbings and said we were concerned about two possible things. One was that very disturbing imagery or videos might be circulated on social media. We did not know whether there would be but we asked the platforms to keep an eye out for that. We also said we were concerned the stabbings might be used as a reason for inciting violence or hatred against members of minority groups. I do not think at that stage we can particularly claim prescience about what was going to happen but we did alert the platforms to that.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

When was that?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

It was around lunchtime on the day. The platforms confirmed to us that they mostly had incident response teams and had set them up. Following what happened that evening and that night, we decided we wanted to understand more about what the platforms had done and we invited the European Commission to join those meetings. This has sometimes been reported as the activation of a formal mechanism under the DSA. It was not quite as formal as that. We invited the European Commission because there will be the need to design a formal mechanism and we thought it would be useful for the European Commission to be involved. It was very happy to be involved. It had quite a good impact on the platforms to have the European Commission involved in those calls as well as ourselves. Through that we got more insight into what the platforms had done and got them to escalate this to suitable senior people within the platforms. It was a question of understanding what they had done. We were very clear that although the engagement by the platforms had been good, that was not the same as compliance. At that stage the European Commission was the only organisation with enforcement powers, so it would be up to it to decide whether there was any breach of DSA obligations as a result. It was in a way a good piece of collaboration. It was not formal but it has laid the groundwork for how we might collaborate in future. Would Ms Comey like to add something?

Ms Stephanie Comey

I might just add something with regard to foreign information, manipulation and interference. Through our work with the national counter disinformation strategy and the working group that was established, the Department of Foreign Affairs reached out and we have become involved in the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats, Hybrid CoE, and its monitoring of European disinformation. It should be said that the main focus there is around Russia but we have a role in that space. Again, that European co-operation is really important. While we are not able to pinpoint a particular thing, Coimisiún na Meán is quite well connected and it is something we know about. We are working with partners to monitor and address when the case arises. I suppose the key thing I want to say is that it is not something we are not monitoring.

Deputy Seán Haughey

It will be an issue if we look at other examples from around the world, so please do continue to monitor that.

Senator Sharon Keogan

The witnesses are very welcome. I am sorry I missed their presentations but I read them very carefully. I have a lot of questions because this is a really important issue for freedom of speech and censorship going forward. I am aware Coimisiún na Meán has only recently been granted some powers with regard to illegal and harmful content.

Has the commission received any complaints to date? If yes, I do not wish Mr. Godfrey to be specific about an individual case. He might give us an example of those cases. I have some concerns regarding the allocation of trusted flagger status. This will require reporting on illegal content, which may include child sexual abuse material. To date, there may have been some robust procedures that apply to anyone who is seeking and working on this material. For example, an organisation such as hotline.ie requires permission from the Minister for Justice to do its work. Will similar forms of regulation apply? Is there potential for some organisation to engage in a lack of compliance upon receiving trusted flagger status?

A lot of NGOs will become trusted flaggers, many of whom are heavily reliant on State funding. The Journal gets approximately €350,000 from an EU fund on foot of its trusted flagger status. To what extent will Coimisiún na Meán be independent of the Government? One of the advisers to the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, has just been appointed to the commission with a hefty salary of more than €120,000. Will that have any impact on the independence of the commission?

Can we have examples of misinformation and disinformation? While I am aware the commission does not have the power to remove misinformation or disinformation, will it be involved in media literacy programmes and calling out harmful or incorrect information?

What mechanism will exist to report issues with the commission and to whom will it be accountable? Will it be straightforward to avail of the accountability mechanism? The remit of Coimisiún na Meán is the DSA. How does it expect the hate speech Bill impact its work should it become law?

In February it was reported by The European Conservative that Síona Cahill is working for the agency. In 2021-----

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry, Senator Keogan is naming individuals. The Senator has already come very close to making somebody very identifiable with an allegation in relation to their appointment. I ask the Senator to be cautious in what she does. There are rules and regulations of which, had she been here at the start when I read out the privilege not, she would be aware.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

No doubt she is aware, as a long-standing Member of the Oireachtas. There are regulations concerning the naming of individuals which I ask her to respect.

Senator Sharon Keogan

While I respect what the Cathaoirleach is saying, it is important that this very important body has the trust of the public to do the job that-----

An Cathaoirleach

I am not asking the Senator, one way or the other, I am asking her to respect the regulations of the committee and of the House.

Senator Sharon Keogan

If someone is appointed to the commission where there is political bias-----

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry, Senator, I am going to ask you to stop now.

Senator Sharon Keogan

What safe cards have been put in place in relation-----

An Cathaoirleach

Senator, you cannot make an allegation. I ask members not to engage with the Senator.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I will move on to the next question.

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry Senator, you are going to withdraw an allegation of political bias you made.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I have not said, I am asking what-----

An Cathaoirleach

You have just accused somebody of political bias. I ask you to withdraw that.

Senator Sharon Keogan

If I have accused someone of political bias, I am asking Mr. Godfrey what protocols are in place to ensure that there is no political bias?

An Cathaoirleach

And you withdraw her allegation of political bias.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I am asking-----

An Cathaoirleach

No. You made an allegation which effectively was to accuse someone of political bias. Do you withdraw that allegation?

Senator Sharon Keogan

If you had let me finish I could get the comment but you obviously do not want me to do that, so I will-----

An Cathaoirleach

No, I want you to withdraw that allegation.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I will withdraw that comment as a mark of respect for you but I am asking the commission what protocols are in place so that we can trust its independence to ensure there no political bias among its staff? What background checks are done to safeguard the recruitment process against such biases?

Mr. Barry Andrews MEP stated that the purpose of the DSA is censorship. Given that the DSA was created at European level, does he agree with that?

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Barry Andrews MEP does not have an ability to defend himself here because he is not present.

Senator Sharon Keogan

It is already noted.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Read the quote.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Unfortunately, I cannot bring it up. I have it here in my document but I have not-----

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Read the quote.

Senator Sharon Keogan

If I can be allowed to go upstairs, because there is no Internet in this room as members know. I would read out the quote; I had the previous quote that you did not want me to read out. Now you want this quote-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Barry Andrews is an MEP and has a public platform so he is capable of responding. However, we just have to note the fact.

Senator Sharon Keogan

This is absolutely unbelievable. The censorship within this room is unbelievable. I have quotes here available from another person who said something and you have censored that. Now you are telling me that Mr. Barry Andrews did not say what he said.

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry, to be absolutely clear, Senator, I did not say that. Other members of the committee raised the veracity of the issue with you.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Can the Commission-----

An Cathaoirleach

I wish to make it 100% clear on my own behalf that my role as Chair is only to enforce the rules and regulations governing how a committee conducts its business in compliance with the regulations laid down by the Houses of the Oireachtas. I am not taking any position on anybody's statements who are members of this committee. That is all I do as Chair.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Fact checking is important and has been hijacked by the left. What steps has the commission has taken to ensure that the people doing the fact checking are not biased and that there is no partisanship and ideological motivation in their role? How can we trust an organisation if certain individuals or companies that have played a role before are to be guardians of factual information when they are ideologically biased?

The other question relates to the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services and the European Digital Media Observatory which were to develop a code of conduct. What role could the commission be expected to play?

They are my questions. There was a recent comment from - I suppose I am not allowed to say this either really - the Federal Communications Commission claiming that TikTok poses a serious threat to US national security. That is distinct from any other media company. Does Mr. Godfrey agree with that statement?

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the Senator. Mr. Godfrey, there are many questions for you and your colleagues. We will give you time to respond.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I will ask Ms Pollock to respond to the question about the complaints we have had. I will ask Ms Comey to respond to the question on media literacy. I will try to run through some of the others if I can.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I thank Mr. Godfrey.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

The Senator asked about trusted flagger status and the possibility of someone having trusted flagger status for child sex abuse material. If anybody were to apply to us wanting to have trusted flagger status so that they could flag that sort of material, we would be extremely careful to make sure they had the appropriate authority to handle that material. As the Senator said, hotline.ie is already in existence for that.

With regard to the independence of the Coimisiún na Meán, there are several issues. It is in our statute that we should act independently. The commissioners are appointed following a process run by the Public Appointments Service and we follow standard public employment practices in our own recruitment.

The Senator asked who we are accountable to. Our main accountability is to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Tourism, Culture, Arts, Sport and Media. Our sponsoring Department is the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. We have also been accountable to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment because it is the policy Department for the DSA. We could also be accountable to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice in respect of our obligations regarding online terrorism content. We have accountability to the Committee of Public Accounts for the way we use public money. We can be held to account by the courts, through judicial review, for the legality of our decisions. There is quite an apparatus of accountability. It is not uncommon for people to write to one of the Oireachtas joint committees to ask questions or invite them to ask us to answer questions.

Senator Sharon Keogan

The commission is funded by the Department of-----

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We are in transition at the moment. The idea is we will be funded by levies. Our predecessor organisation, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, was funded by levies on broadcasters. This year, we have introduced new levies for video sharing platforms and video-on-demand providers. The idea is that we will be 100% levy funded from next year. We have had some Exchequer funding in the start-up phase. Last year, we had some Exchequer funding through the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and, this year, a little from the Department of Justice. The idea is we will be 100% levy funded for our regulatory activities in due course.

The Senator asked about the hate speech Bill and what its impact would be if it were to become law. The question of whether it becomes law is obviously a matter for the Oireachtas and not us. The DSA places obligations on platforms regarding illegal content. If the hate speech Bill becomes law, that will change the scope of illegal content. For example, I have observed that the Bill before the House makes expressing hatred and violence against women illegal for the first time, whereas the current law does not bite on misogynistic speech. Types of speech, such as incitement to violence and hatred, against a broader variety of groups will be included than is the case under the current law. That will have a knock-on impact on the way the DSA operates.

The Senator mentioned that somebody said the purpose of the DSA was censorship. That is certainly not how we see it. The purpose of the DSA is outlined in Article 1 of the DSA Act, which is to ensure a safe, trusted, online environment where liberty, including liberty of expression, is protected and there is innovation. Its purpose is not censorship. As I said, we certainly do not see ourselves as a censor at all. We are there to ensure a thriving, diverse media landscape, one where all opinions and a variety of voices can be heard, and people's right and agency to make free choices in elections is protected.

The Senator asked about the ERGA and EDMO code of conduct on misinformation. That is something our predecessor organisation, the BAI, was very much involved in putting together. We are a member of ERGA as well as a member of the European Board for Digital Services. That is something we have had a role in.

The Senator asked whether we see TikTok as a threat to national security. We are not a national security agency. Our job is to protect the users of platforms from harmful and illegal content but not to deal with those national security issues.

I will take a deep breath and ask Ms Pollock to talk a little about complaints. Ms Comey will then talk about media literacy.

Ms Anne-Marie Pollock

On complaints, the purpose of the contact centre is to provide advice and guidance to users about their rights under the DSA. If a possible infringement of the DSA is reported, it is escalated to our complaints team. As of 17 February, when the DSA came into effect, we have 261 cases of which nine have been escalated as possible DSA infringements. They are currently being looked into. We receive complaints via phone and email. The contact centre is open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday to Friday. We also have a lot of information on this on our website.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Ms Pollock said there were 261 cases. Without divulging-----

Ms Anne-Marie Pollock

Contacts.

Senator Sharon Keogan

-----individual cases, would it be okay to give an example of the type of cases the commission is dealing with about which people have been sending it complaints?

Ms Anne-Marie Pollock

We have a variety. Does Mr. Godfrey want to speak to some context on that?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

At present, we have got quite a small number so we are not really saying specifically. However, we have not had a lot of complaints about misinformation or disinformation. Quite a lot of the context has been about broadcasting. Some of the complaints we are looking at include a variety of things under the DSA. We hope to evaluate whether they allege a real breach of the DSA. In due course, we will be transparent about that and will, at some point, produce a report on the complaints we have had.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Do some of those 261 cases concern the referendums that recently took place in Ireland?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I have not got an absolute report, but I was told we have not had any or many-----

Senator Sharon Keogan

Any or many? There is a difference.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I do not want to mislead the Senator-----

Senator Sharon Keogan

You might have had some, possibly.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

I do not know the information and I do not want to mislead the Senator. I do not want to give her the impression that we have not had any at all. I will certainly get that information and write to the committee to let it know whether we have had contacts or complaints about referendums.

Ms Stephanie Comey

I am sorry, will the Senator ask her question about media literacy again? I want to be sure I give her the right answer. She asked a question about media literacy and wanted to know-----

Senator Sharon Keogan

Yes. It was about whether the commission would present some examples of what it considers to be misinformation and disinformation. While I am aware the commission does not have the power to remove misinformation or disinformation, will it be involved in media literacy programmes and calling out harmful or incorrect information?

Ms Stephanie Comey

Thank you. I just wanted to be sure that I had the right angle. I thank the Senator for that. We have a statutory obligation with regard to promoting media literacy. This is something that pre-existed the digital online safety and media regulation, DOSMR, Act; it is also in the Broadcasting Act 2009. One of the ways we are giving effect to that obligation is via our promotion of the Media Literacy Ireland network and the work it does in gathering stakeholders and promoting the Be Media Smart message. It is very much a message of empowerment for users. Media literacy is not about giving people the "correct" information.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I am well aware of that.

Ms Stephanie Comey

It is very much about enabling people to decide where they want to go to find where the correct information might be. It is also a very broad concept. It has technical aspects on how to use media but also democratic ones on how to participate in society via media. It is quite a broad concept.

We continue to do this work with Media Literacy Ireland. Mr. Godfrey mentioned Coimisiún na Meán's current public awareness campaign around the flagging of illegal content and directing users to the platforms to report content they have encountered that is illegal. We are monitoring the success of that campaign in the field. We are still running it so I have no data on it, but it is something we will be happy to share further down the line. We will continue that work of empowering Irish people to find the correct information for what they need to know.

Senator Sharon Keogan

On politically biased or partisan staffers, what is the recruitment process around that and what safeguards are put in place by the commission? Was that answered?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We fully understand the public recruitment policies.

An Cathaoirleach

I will take the opportunity to pose some of my own questions. For me, it comes down to a number of areas.

I have covered this with some of the other people we have had before the committee. Coimisiún na Meán's role, as Deputy Howlin alluded to earlier, involves almost a conflict between its declared role in the supervision and doing that in conjunction with the platforms and not being a vehicle for censorship or restriction in any way. It is disappointing that the European guidelines are still not finalised. They are meant to be finalised only by Easter. If you are living in a political world, the European elections are well and truly under way. It is disappointing that this has not been formally sorted out. The guidelines all sound very good and very reasonable but they are guidelines.

It comes down to the following. First, what happens if the companies do not play ball and do not respond to the guidelines? I want the witnesses to clarify that. This was asked earlier and, to be honest, the answer was a bit nebulous. The European Union is very fond, through the Commission, in various areas, of saying, "One per cent of your global turnover, lads, for a breach of whatever it is you have done." I presume there is nothing even remotely close to that. I had an engagement with these platforms probably five or six years ago, and the cumulative spend by most of them on what they were using or doing to enforce content moderation was probably way less than one day's profit. These are corporations that make billions and billions. That gives a very clear indication of where their thinking was at that time. I appreciate that Mr. Godfrey said Coimisiún na Meán is in only a start-up phase and has had only very initial engagement with the platforms. I am sorry to be so sceptical about this but I wish Coimisiún na Meán luck with its engagement. The platforms are very good at sounding as if they will do something but, realistically, they sound like they will do one thing and do another, without proper engagement or real strength. The guidelines sound good, but I am asking if there is any strength in them or any repercussions - real repercussions - for breach of the guidelines. In the absence of that, I do not think we will see any change at all.

Coimisiún na Meán has a very difficult job. There is no question about that. As the witnesses know, there are those out there who will seek to undermine Coimisiún na Meán from day one. They will try to make it out to be a puppet of the State and a untrustworthy source. It will have to contend with that on one side and, at the same time, unfortunately, with the platforms. We are not talking about censorship here. We are just talking about trying to take out the nastiest extremist elements of complete falsehood and, even more worrying to me, particularly in the context of what we have been discussing in the past few weeks, dealing with that vile element that is actually targeting and threatening individuals. It is not making any type of political content but is targeting from the most vulnerable in society, such as immigrants arriving into our country, to political leaders, to people who just happen to be for some reason on the public platform for one moment. I am really interested to hear whether the witnesses think Coimisiún na Meán has enough of an ability in that regard.

I want to change the question to the witnesses slightly. There has been no real talk about TV moderation, but it is part of Coimisiún na Meán's remit. By and large, we have very good mainstream television broadcasting, but we do have a proliferation of niche channels - the likes of GB News - that are supplied through platforms. Some of those channels have put on air people who would not necessarily get a platform otherwise. Is there any regulatory role in that regard? We had an example on a pan-European basis where Russia Today was eventually removed from most services. Is there anything within Coimisiún na Meán's remit in that regard? Particularly in a European context, some of the messaging that comes out then gets packaged into neat 30-second snippets and either put up on YouTube or rebroadcast through social media channels. That area is a concern as well, and we have not touched on it at all.

Those are my two main questions to the witnesses.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

The fines for breaches of the DSA can be up to 6% of turnover so they can be quite-----

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry. I understand that. I was referring to the guidelines.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

Yes. I will come to that. The guidelines do have a hook in the obligations. There is an obligation on the very large platforms to assess risks and to mitigate those risks. The guidelines are tied to those obligations so they are guidelines as to how platforms should mitigate the risks. A breach of the guidelines may not in itself be a breach of the DSA but can be indicative of a breach of the obligation to mitigate the risks. I may be talking slightly out of turn because this is the European Commission's competence to enforce but, ultimately, the guidelines are part of the compliance and enforcement mechanism around that obligation to assess and mitigate risks. As I said in my opening statement, the risks specifically include the risks to the integrity of elections and to civic discourse.

Then there are other things. I think there has been quite a bit of discussion about online content that threatens participants in public life or threatens or incites hatred against politicians or other people. Those are separate obligations, although they may be also covered by the guidelines. They are obligations in their own right and ones where we and the Commission both have an enforcement role. I am not saying this will be easy, but the prospect that this could end up with those very large fines is, I think, an incentive for platforms to follow the guidelines or at least, if they do not follow every aspect of them, to be able to explain why. There could be something about the platform or something else it has done that should achieve the same result. I do not think the guidelines will be a complete paper tiger. I think they will be extremely useful. No doubt different platforms will follow them to a different extent, and it will not be just a one-off thing for these elections. It will be a question of continually improving the platforms' compliance performance. These are guidelines as to how to comply with a regulatory obligation. A failure to follow the guidelines, as I said, is not in itself a breach but might be indicative of a breach. That is the mechanism the DSA sets up, so the guidelines are actually issued. There is a specific article in the DSA that empowers the Commission to issue these guidelines, so they are supposed to have a real impact on compliance and on how compliance will be assessed.

You also asked about TV. Within the European Union, TV and broadcast content is regulated on a country-of-origin basis, so we regulate broadcasters based in Ireland and other people in the EU regulate other broadcasters. Of course, wherever they are from, they will have obligations about fairness and balance in their news and current affairs coverage. Apart from broadcasting, video on demand will also come into the regulatory regime, again on a country-of-origin basis. Video on demand can just be streaming but it can also be, as you talked about, a broadcaster that has a channel on a video-sharing platform whereby it uploads a catalogue of content. That can also fall within the ambit of video-on-demand regulation.

An Cathaoirleach

Does Coimisiún na Meán have any role in channels that are effectively on platforms - the equivalent of Sky or Virgin Media or anything like that?

Mr. Godfrey is saying that the country of origin is the primary regulator for that but the content of those channels is being provided and redistributed through an Irish service.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We only have a role if they are European. If it is a British channel, for example, there would need to be a regulator somewhere in Europe for them but it will be wherever they have chosen to base their European headquarters. That country would be the regulator of them. We do not regulate them because they are received in Ireland, we only regulate ones where the broadcaster is based in Ireland or has chosen to be regulated in Ireland. It is the same framework but the regulator is where the country of origin is.

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy Howlin has indicated and then I will come back in.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

The second role for Coimisiún na Meán that has been set out in the presentation to us is to promote impartial, fair and objective information, and that the commission will do that by supporting platforms to do this. What sort of supports does the commission give to either national or local media? If there are such supports how does the commission monitor this to ensure the results from that are actually fair, impartial and objective?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We are talking here primarily about the rules we have in our media service codes, which apply to the broadcasters in Ireland. We have a whole code on fairness, impartiality and objectiveness in news and current affairs coverage. This has been around for quite a long time and is not a new thing for Coimisiún na Meán. We get a number of complaints when, for example, people say to us they have seen a news programme or listened to a radio programme and they believe it was not fair or objective and so forth. We consider those complaints. With the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act 2022 some of the procedural issues have changed a bit but, essentially, when we see the complaints we must decide whether they are valid. In the past we have asked for apologies or for things to be withdrawn and we now have the possibility to impose financial sanctions as well if necessary. That is the main role of the commission. We place an obligation on people to be fair, objective and impartial.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

On the monitoring, is it dependent on people complaining as opposed to the commission doing the monitoring?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

Yes. At the moment it is based on complaints. It is about what is actually broadcast and it is about particular programmes. Sometimes we get complaints such as "They should have had a programme on X or on something" but the editorial independence of the broadcaster is very important. We only get involved if there is a particular programme where there is a complaint about the programme having breached the obligations of fairness and impartiality. I will say that people are quite quick to complain.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

What are the supports the commission gives, and particularly to local broadcasters?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

We have a Sound and Vision scheme where we do give some money to the production of sound broadcasting or television programming that has a particular cultural significance for Ireland. On the whole that has not included much news and current affairs.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Does the commission intend to do that? The presentation of local impartial information is as important as national information. Often now the local service has a greater listenership. Does the commission intend to go into that space?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

Absolutely. The Future of Media Commission report identified that local journalism has suffered compared to how it was several years ago. I believe that six schemes were recommended in the report, two of which we are about to consult on. One scheme is for local journalism reporting on the activities of county councils and other local authorities. Another is about local court reporting. The content produced under those schemes will be available to broadcasters, print and online also. It will be open content. Local radio stations will be entitled to apply. We are planning to have a separate scheme for each local authority. The local radio stations are one sector that can apply for that funding.

Ms Stephanie Comey

Local broadcasters and community broadcasters are currently held to the same regulatory framework as the national broadcasters on the code of fairness, impartiality and objectivity. They must obey the same rules at the moment.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

How long is retention required of previously broadcast material? Is that enforced?

Ms Stephanie Comey

It is 90 days in the 2009 Act but here we are not talking about the content Mr. Godfrey referred to, which would be funded by the Sound and Vision scheme and held in perpetuity because it is of significant importance. Generally it is 90 days. Some stations retain it for longer for archival purposes but legally it is 90 days.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Have all the online platforms signed up to the guidelines in the Digital Services Act? I see the commission has the power to issue compliance notices. How long does that compliance notice take and what is the follow up? For example, if a complaint is made and the compliance notice is issued I understand the fines are up to 6% of the gross turnover of these particular agencies, which is quite a heavy fine. That is one of my questions.

There is a lot of awful online content. Hate is not exclusive to a particular type of politician. Hate happens to all politicians and it does not matter what side of the spectrum we are on. Hate comes at us from every side. We live in a democracy but can the commission ultimately overrule Irish regulators? Would Ireland respond to requests to censor political content, for example from Christine Anderson MEP? Ms Anderson was in a briefing here previously that I had. There was uproar with regard to inviting somebody such as an elected Member of the European Parliament who might not share the views some of us might have here within our Parliament. Ms Anderson was a guest here as a democratically elected Member of the EU Parliament. What are the witnesses' views on censoring political content from Members of the European Parliament with views that one may not like or may not agree with?

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

It is about having the platform signed up to the guidelines. All very large online platforms have no option. They are bound by the obligation to do risk assessments and to mitigate those risks, the guidelines about how they should mitigate the risks that apply to them, and the monitoring of whether they followed the guidelines and the consequences if they do not apply to them. They do not volunteer for this, it is the law. Obviously that is for the European Commission if it comes to enforcement.

On compliance notices, again that is very new piece of legislation for us so I cannot yet answer the question about exactly what our internal process would be on the timeframes on that.

The last question was to do with censoring a Member of European Parliament. I would say that it does not really matter what people's views are, we are not there to censor them.

Senator Sharon Keogan

That is okay-----

An Cathaoirleach

If members want to come in and continue this conversation I will just ask Deputy Howlin to conclude the discussion and take over as Cathaoirleach, as I need to do something at this point.

Deputy Brendan Howlin took the Chair.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

We shall bring the meeting to-----

Senator Sharon Keogan

Before I finish, I have to leave-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Through the Chair.

Senator Sharon Keogan

Yes, through the Chair. I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach.

I have to leave but I want to wish Mr. Jeremy Godfrey really well in the job he has ahead of him. It is a very tumultuous time in politics and in media throughout the world and the representatives from Coimisiún na Meán are the guardians of our democracy. I wish them well.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Finally, we will have a brief question from Deputy Ó Murchú.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Having never been brief in my life, I will begin. On some level, Coimisiún na Meán has an impossible task. We obviously wish its representatives luck. As I said before, it is taking on Goliath but is an absolute necessity based on the issues we have. There are a number of things. When we get into the idea of trusted flaggers and all the rest of it, we have all seen the hate and stuff that is right on the verge of being nearly violent actions, which we want to see dealt with. I have no difficulty with most reasonable views being expressed reasonably but dealing with the issue and the slaughter that is going on in Gaza at this time, you would always have a fear, particularly when talking about American-owned companies, that certain views may be more accepted than others. We do not want a difficulty where we have an element of one-sided censorship, for want of a better term. We need to make sure all reasonable political views can be expressed reasonably and we do not have a case that certain flaggers are trusted beyond others. We have seen the example of the pro-Zionist lobby that is incredibly powerful and has serious reach, particularly online. I would hate to see that this would have an impact. I imagine part of that work would fall under the general remit of Coimisiún na Meán, among all the other impossibilities it has to deal with at this point.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I will give Mr. Godfrey his final platform to conclude. It was rather a deep last question rather than an ancillary question.

Mr. Jeremy Godfrey

It was a very deep question. It is about having a safe, trusted online environment from our point of view and where a variety of voices and all opinion can be held. When it comes to trusted flaggers, there are some pretty objective criteria for appointing them. Trusted flaggers are not there to be able to pursue a political agenda one way or another. They are there because they can be trusted to identify types of illegal content and their flags deserved to be treated with priority. That is all I will say.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Godfrey and his colleagues for remaining for very detailed questioning. I know in many ways they are still pathfinding in a very complex world but we all speak with one voice on this issue and wish them well. The coimisiún really is an important bulwark to ensure our democracy, free communication and freedom of speech is all maintained into the future. I thank them very much indeed. That concludes our business today and the committee is adjourned sine die.

The joint committee adjourned at 11.43 a.m. sine die.