Le rapport Bronner remis le 11 janvier 2022 avait pour mission de formuler des recommandations relatives à la dérégulation du marché de l’information en ligne et notamment la circulation de fausses informations.
The work of the Bronner Commission insists on many points already covered by legislative texts that have been completed or are being drafted, but it is distinguished by its recommendations concerning the control of algorithmic logic and the drying up of the financing of certain websites via targeted advertising, as well as its recommendations advocating training in critical thinking in order to guard against online disinformation.
Launched by the President of the Republic, the commission " Les Lumières à l'ère Numérique " had for mission to formulate recommendations relating to the deregulation of the market of the online information, it handed over its report on January 11th, 2022.
The work of the commission was directed by the sociologist Gérald Bronner. For a long time, he has been concerned with underlining the risks induced by the interaction of the developments of the Internet era with the mechanisms of cognitive psychology of the human brain, particularly in the field of disinformation1.
The report of the Bronner Commission first presents an analysis of the psychosocial mechanisms of misinformation and explains that the saturation of the online information market puts our capacity for epistemic vigilance to a severe test. Indeed, the number of contents we are confronted with is such that we are not more permeable to false information. Moreover, although false information is a minority among all news contents on the web, its virality is multiplied since a content provoking a feeling of panic or revolt is very likely to hold the attention of Internet users2.
Finally, the structure of online information and in particular the " sharing " of content made possible by social networks accentuates our propensity to believe false information since numerous studies show that the more information - whether true or false - is repeated to an individual, the more likely the latter will believe it to be true3.
Following the publication of this report, the President of the Republic announced the launch of a series of projects designed to " make France a pioneer in the fight against disinformation and the regulation of large platforms ". The various projects will focus on (1) reinforcing education in critical thinking, (2) intensifying research on the phenomena of disinformation, (3) controlling the financing of actors who harm information and (4) intensifying pressure on online platforms4.
The report5 submitted by the Bronner Commission details various recommendations in the continuity of actions already undertaken at the international and national levels (I), but stands out for its proposals concerning the control of algorithmic logic and the control of the financing of certain websites via targeted advertising (II), as well as its recommendations concerning the training of critical thinking (III).
The Bronner report recommends several measures in the continuity of actions undertaken at the national and European level in order to fight against hate on social networks and to regulate the large online platforms. At the national level, we can mention the law against the manipulation of information, the so-called " Avia " law against hateful content, or the law reinforcing the respect of the principles of the republic. At the European level, the draft Digital Services Act regulation, adopted by the European Parliament in December 2021, is intended to be a horizontal legislation introducing content moderation obligations for platforms.
The most notable proposals concern the strengthening of the control powers of ARCOM (former CSA). The report suggests the creation of a formalized reporting procedure open to any citizen, similar to the procedure for reporting audiovisual content. It is thus proposed to modify article 17-2 of the law n° 86-1067 of September 30, 1986 so that ARCOM can " be seized by any person who has encountered a difficulty in obtaining the intervention and cooperation of a platform in order to prevent or stop the massive diffusion of content likely to convey false news that could disturb public order "6. This reporting procedure is commendable, however, unlike the dissemination of audiovisual content on television channels or radio, which is essentially limited, the dissemination of false information on platforms is unlimited. Under these conditions, the hypothesis of ARCOM becoming saturated in the face of too great an influx of reports should not be overlooked.
In addition, the Bronner Report proposes to mobilize the civil liability of persons knowingly spreading false news7. The flexibility of the basis should allow
In this case, " the civil judge takes into account two variables in proportioning his sanction: the virality of the broadcast and the relative influence of the person who broadcasts or relays the faulty broadcast " (Rapp. p. 81).
At present, such a provision has never been considered. If the effectiveness of civil liability is not contested, it is possible to think that the volume and speed of the sharing of false news will not allow to catch all its authors before a judge.
Thus, faced with the particular structure of the Internet, many traditional methods of prevention and sanction seem difficult to apply. This observation led the authors of the Bronner report to look into other innovative ways to fight against online disinformation.
The Bronner commission first draws up an inventory of the flows of online news exchanges and notes that if there is one unfulfilled promise of the Internet, it is that of the qualitative enlargement of the offer as much as of the demand. Indeed, the observation of the exchanges of online news flows reveals that the cognitive market is animated by brief, sudden and massive effects of attention concentration, commonly called " buzz ". Hence, on the Internet, competition rages to attract the fleeting attention and the attraction that we may collectively have for a subject.
Faced with this observation, the Bronner report recommends regulating the design of the algorithmic logic that governs the organization of online information. In particular, the Bronner commission suggests allowing users to better represent the real prevalence of opinions by deactivating by default the popularity metrics of posts on social networks (e.g. likes) while putting forward metrics that allow to judge the epistemic quality of content (e.g. sharing history). It is also recommended to encourage platforms to pay more attention to the moderation of posts published by influencers whose visibility may exceed their representativeness on certain subjects8.
The Bronner report also mentions the subject of " dark patterns " present on digital interfaces, which are ways of manipulating or deceiving users and capturing their attention in order to make a profit. In the wake of numerous works initiated in recent years, partly taken up by the proposed Digital Service Act regulation, the Bronner report insists on the importance of opening a reflection on the logic that guides the design of digital interfaces9.
Finally, the Bronner Commission discusses a topic that is not yet well connected to the spread of false information online: programmatic advertising. This type of advertising uses algorithms generated by artificial intelligence to determine the best ad placement by product type and target audience through a real-time bidding system. Currently, programmatic advertising providers are required to communicate to the advertiser
" All measures implemented [...] to avoid the dissemination of advertising messages on illicit media or in broadcasting universes indicated by the advertiser as being prejudicial to the image of its brand and its reputation.
However, there is no obligation for them to communicate the exhaustive list of sites on which their advertisements can be found.
However, the Bronner report notes that it has been apparent for several years that programmatic advertisements are frequently found on sites that are known to propagate, and often repeatedly, characterized disinformation likely to disturb public order. The report therefore recommends that programmatic advertising actors be made more responsible by encouraging the use of exclusion and inclusion lists of websites such as those drawn up by NewsGuard or the Global Disinformation Index in order to dry up the financing of disinformation sites11.
Finally, the report of the Bronner Commission proposes solutions beyond the law, which alone does not seem to be sufficient to curb the phenomenon of the spread of false information online. According to the report, the cognitive vigilance and the development of the analytical mind of each individual are probably the best individual bulwarks against the diffusion of false information. Each human being would have the resources to avoid falling into the trap of misinformation and errors in reasoning.
The Bronner Report is cautious about making concrete recommendations on how to teach critical thinking to young people, presumably aware of the crucial ethical and political issues involved. However, the recommendations call for the creation of a body to gather existing data, develop standardized protocols, and implement the evaluation of teaching materials and training devices, as well as to solicit teachers' experience on this subject.12
In addition, the Bronner Commission considers it appropriate to systematize and homogenize the teaching of Media and Information Education (MIE) included in the Loi d'Orientation pour la Refondation de l'École of July 8, 2013. Currently, only students in primary and secondary schools benefit from this teaching, which the Bronner report proposes to extend to universities, the cultural world and business13.
This aspect of the report submitted to the President of the Republic seems to have retained all the attention of the latter, who cited the reinforcement of critical thinking as the first of the various projects that were launched following the submission of the work of the Bronner Commission. It is thus advisable to remain attentive to the next developments that will result from it.
[1]See e.g. Gérald Bronner, La Démocratie des crédules, Paris, PUF, 2013.
[2] See e.g. CSA (2020). The spread of false information on social networks: a study of the Twitter platform https://www.csa.fr/Informer/Collections-du-CSA/Focus-Toutes-les-etudes-et-les-comptes-rendus-synthetiques-proposant-un-zoom-sur-un-sujet-d-actualite/La-propagation-des-fausses-informations-sur-les-reseaux-sociaux-etude-de-la-plateforme-Twitter
[3] For a meta-analysis of these studies, see Dechêne, A., Stahl, C., Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2010). The truth about the truth: A meta-analytic review of the truth effect. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 238-257.
[4] https://www.elysee.fr/emmanuel-macron/2022/01/11/remise-du-rapport-de-la-commission-bronner
[6] Report, recommendation 19, p. 84.
[7] Report, recomm. 18, p.82.
[8] Report, recommendations 4, 5 and 6, p. 50 and 51.
[9] Rapp, recomm. 2, p.46.
[10] Article 3 of Decree No. 2017-159 of February 9, 2017 on digital advertising services.
[11] Rapp, recomm. 8, p.109.
[12] Report, recommendations 24 and 25, p. 93.
[13] Report, recommendations 27 and 29, p. 97 and 98.
