The media has been subject to the law on the right to correction since 1984 (Organic Law No. 2/1984 of 26 March). This law made sense as it was at the time when social networks did not exist and possible fake news, hoaxes and half-truths were published in some media outlets. But today the picture is very different. Hoaxes are born, grow and reproduce on social networks and come not from the media but from individual users.

It may give the impression that these profiles are publishing hoaxes with complete impunity, beyond criticism from their followers and/or other users of the platform. But it’s over. Now this correction law will also apply to influencers.

context. The Council of Ministers has approved changes to the law on the right to correction that will affect “specifically concerned” users as well as the media. According to El País, the Government considers a user of “special interest” to be a user with more than 100,000 followers on a social network or more than 200,000 followers across all platforms on which they have a presence. According to the statement made by Presidency Minister Félix Bolaños at the press conference:

“These are users who disseminate information and other content through these platforms and who, due to the number of followers they have, have a reach and influence comparable to traditional media, constructing themselves as true shapers of communication and public opinion.” ; and therefore they must be subject to the possibility of correction of their contents.”

Image | Magnus Mueller

What does this law consist of? Let’s imagine a media that published information about Pepito that ultimately turned out to be not entirely accurate. Pepito has the opportunity to correct this information within seven calendar days after its publication, insofar as this information affects it. The correction should be sent to the media manager, be limited to specific facts (without stating an opinion), and unless necessary, its length should not significantly exceed the length of the original information.

If the requirements are met, the media “must publish or disseminate the correction, without commentary or apostille, within three days from the date of receipt, similar to the subject matter on which the corrected information was published or distributed.” The idea, of course, is that the correction has the same scope as the original release, in order to correct the error.

The role of platforms. Previously, the correction had to be sent to the media manager (by the way, this condition, along with the condition of not being able to give an opinion that we mentioned before, was eliminated with this change). This was as easy as sending a certified letter. But there are several problems with social networks:

1. It is possible that the affected user does not have an account on the social network through which the information was disseminated and therefore has no way of contacting the person who sent the information.
2. The account that publishes false information may not have any form of communication.
3. There may be no way to verify that the sender of the hoax received the information correctly.

Therefore, platforms need to have “a mechanism that is easily visible and accessible, ensuring that the applicant, whether or not a user of the platform in question, has a means of directing the remediation directly and promptly, with continued acceptance and monitoring of the process”.

Featured image | Marten Bjork on Unsplash

in Xataka | A magazine had been publishing articles written by artificial intelligence using fake editors for months. Of course they were discovered