Governments around the world are strictly regulating information on social media in the interests of addressing fake news. There is, however, a risk that the uncontrolled spread of information could increase the adverse effects of the COVID-19 health emergency through the influence of false and misleading news. Yet governments may well use health emergency regulation as a pretext for implementing draconian restrictions on the right to freedom of expression, as well as increasing social media censorship (ie chilling effects). This article seeks to challenge the stringent legislative and administrative measures governments have recently put in place in order to analyse their negative implications for the right to freedom of expression and to suggest different regulatory approaches in the context of public law. These controversial government policies are discussed in order to clarify why freedom of expression cannot be allowed to be jeopardised in the process of trying to manage fake news. Firstly, an analysis of the legal definition of fake news in academia is presented in order to establish the essential characteristics of the phenomenon (Section II). Secondly, the legislative and administrative measures implemented by governments at both international (Section III) and European Union (EU) levels (Section IV) are assessed, showing how they may undermine a core human right by curtailing freedom of expression. Then, starting from the premise of social media as a “watchdog” of democracy and moving on to the contention that fake news is a phenomenon of “mature” democracy, the article argues that public law already protects freedom of expression and ensures its effectiveness at the international and EU levels through some fundamental rules (Section V). There follows a discussion of the key regulatory approaches, and, as alternatives to government intervention, self-regulation and especially empowering users are proposed as strategies to effectively manage fake news by mitigating the risks of undue interference by regulators in the right to freedom of expression (Section VI). The article concludes by offering some remarks on the proposed solution and in particular by recommending the implementation of reliability ratings on social media platforms (Section VII).

为了打击假新闻，世界各国政府都在严格监管社交媒体上的信息。但是，信息的不受控制的传播可能会通过虚假和误导性新闻的影响增加 COVID-19 突发卫生事件的不利影响。然而，政府很可能以卫生紧急情况监管为借口，对言论自由权实施严厉限制，以及加强社交媒体审查（即寒蝉效应）。本文旨在挑战政府最近实施的严格立法和行政措施，以分析其对言论自由权的负面影响，并在公法背景下提出不同的监管方法。讨论这些有争议的政府政策是为了澄清为什么在试图管理假新闻的过程中不能允许言论自由受到损害。首先，分析了学术界对假新闻的法律定义，以确定该现象的本质特征（第二节）。其次，评估各国政府在国际（第 III 部分）和欧盟（EU）层面（第 IV 部分）实施的立法和行政措施，显示它们如何通过限制言论自由来破坏核心人权。然后，从社交媒体作为民主“看门狗”的前提出发，转向假新闻是一种“成熟”民主现象的论点，文章认为，公法已经保护了言论自由，并通过一些基本规则确保其在国际和欧盟层面的有效性（第五节）。随后讨论了关键的监管方法，并且，作为政府干预的替代方案，自我监管，特别是赋予用户权力，被提议作为通过减轻监管机构对言论自由权的不当干预风险来有效管理假新闻的策略（第六节）。本文最后对提议的解决方案提供了一些评论，特别是建议在社交媒体平台上实施可靠性评级（第 VII 节）。并且，作为政府干预的替代方案，自我监管，特别是赋予用户权力，被提议作为通过减轻监管机构对言论自由权的不当干预风险来有效管理假新闻的策略（第 VI 节）。本文最后对提议的解决方案提供了一些评论，特别是建议在社交媒体平台上实施可靠性评级（第 VII 节）。并且，作为政府干预的替代方案，自我监管，特别是赋予用户权力，被提议作为通过减轻监管机构对言论自由权的不当干预风险来有效管理假新闻的策略（第 VI 节）。本文最后对提议的解决方案提供了一些评论，特别是建议在社交媒体平台上实施可靠性评级（第 VII 节）。