Economist Dani Rodrik argues that global economic governance is characterized by a trilemma: ‘we cannot have hyperglobalization, democracy, and national self-determination all at once. We can have at most two out of three’. This trilemma can also be applied to internet governance and global platform governance as a corollary global internet-governance impossibility theorem . This trilemma, which emphasizes who sets the rules and the degree of democratic accountability they face, offers us a way to evaluate online content-regulation proposals. This article applies this framework to four prominent platform-governance proposals: Facebook’s proposal for a global ‘Oversight Board’; David Kaye’s book Speech Police ; the United Kingdom’s Online Harms White Paper ; and French president Emmanuel Macron’s speech to the 2018 Internet Governance Forum. Of the four, only Macron’s framework offers a pathway to reconciling democratic accountability with the existence of different legitimate views on how content should be regulated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Blayne Haggart (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: