ARTICLE IN PRESS JID: CLSR [m7;December 2, 2019;20:2] computer law & security review xxx (xxxx) xxx Available online at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/CLSR A new framework for online content moderation Ivar A. Hartmann * Center for Technology & Society (CTS) at FGV Law School, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Available online xxx a b s t r a c t I wish to provide a description of context and practical changes in the institutions, places and tools of speech moderation before and after the internet. This description revolves around legally and institutionally relevant aspects of how excesses in speech were iden- tifed and countered in order to provide support for a normative claim about what online speech moderation should look like today and in the future. The article starts with a list of elements of content moderation up until three decades ago and the follow with a list of elements of content moderation today. The primary goal is to contrast the two scenarios in order to highlight the inconvenience of certain assumptions lawmakers, lawyers and judges make on how communication works in a networked society. I do not intend to provide alter- native descriptions to the characteristics of this phenomenon in order to dispute prevailing descriptions. My point is merely to uncover certain aspect that usually remain unnoticed or underestimated in the legal debate about content moderation. The third part of the ar- ticle will then propose the outline of a new procedural legal framework for moderation of online speech without dwelling too deep on considerations of substantive legal standards for balancing speech. © 2019 Ivar A. Hartmann. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The goal of balancing free speech and countervailing interests or rights 1,2,3 such as privacy, copyright and honor on the In- ternet is widely considered to be as complex as it is central to a well-functioning global internet. It is naturally an interna- tional objective as much as a national issue, but in this article I wish to make a contribution that is focused on the national context and legal possibilities - even if conceptually my de- scriptive and normative propositions could be applied to in- ternational law in many respects. * Corresponding author: Praia de Botafogo, 190 - 13° andar, Rio de Janeiro – RJ, Brazil. E-mail address: ivar.hartmann@fgv.br 1 Eduardo Andrés Bertoni, ‘The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights: a dialogue on freedom of expression standards’ (2009), 03 European Human Rights Law Review. 2 Jean-François Flauss, ‘The European Court of Human Rights and the Freedom of Expression’ (2009), 84 (03) Indiana Law Journal. 3 Malcolm D Evans, ‘From Cartoons to Crucifxes: Current Controversies Concerning The Freedom of Religion and The Freedom of Expression Before The European Court of Human Rights’ (2010), 26 Journal of Law & Religion. It is certainly necessary to discuss legal standards for re- viewing and moderating speech, in the sense of substantive rules about what can and cannot be said online. Many land- mark studies have been dedicated to this purpose and my goal here is not to provide any advancements in this front. Rather, I wish to provide an overview of context and practical changes in the institutions, places and tools of speech moderation be- fore and after the internet. This analysis will revolve around legally and institutionally relevant aspects of how excesses in speech were identifed and countered in order to provide sup- port for a normative claim about what online speech moder- ation should look like today and in the future. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105376 0267-3649/© 2019 Ivar A. Hartmann. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Please cite this article as: Ivar A. Hartmann, A new framework for online content moderation, Computer Law & Security Review: The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105376