The federal states want to impose a quota on Tiktok, YouTube and Instagram for contributions from reputable media. What experts say about the prospects of success of the reform project.
The Broadcasting Commission plans to intervene in recommendation systems of digital platforms. She wants to introduce a quota of 20 percent for contributions from “diversity-relevant media”.
By strengthening reputable journalistic sources, democratic principles such as diversity of opinion should be secured.
Private media can apply for public value status, which allows preferential broadcasting alongside public broadcasting offerings.
Critics such as Bitkom speaker Konstantin Peveling consider the quota to be a significant interference with the platforms' freedom of design. The practical effect of the regulation remains questionable.
Dusseldorf. The federal states want to force digital companies to modify their business model. With a reform of the State Treaty for Digital Media, the Broadcasting Commission plans to prescribe a fixed quota of reputable journalistic offerings to the respective recommendation systems. In doing so, she wants to secure democratic principles such as diversity of opinion. The public hearing on the project ends this Friday.
For example, anyone who scrolls on the social media platforms Tiktok or searches for tutorials on YouTube should in future see a contribution from “diversity-relevant media” for every fifth recommendation. Platforms such as Tiktok (Bytedance), YouTube (Google) and Instagram (Meta) show users videos and posts that are selected entirely by computer programs. The companies keep the systematics of their automated recommendation systems strictly secret.
YouTube Germany boss Andreas Briese warns against interfering with these algorithms. “If viewers are artificially shown videos in their feed that they don’t want to see in the situation, then trust is undermined.” The ARD, on the other hand, welcomes the quota approach.
But: How useful is such a quota - and can it even be enforced on the platforms?
According to the draft, the quota of 20 percent is based on the proportion that advertising in feeds usually has today. Every fifth recommendation should therefore come from a defined group of recognized media offerings. The platform's algorithm continues to decide which posts these are. In this way, the “character of the platform is retained,” it says in the draft.
Critics complain that a quota of 20 percent significantly restricts the platforms in the design of their algorithms. Konstantin Peveling from the digital association Bitkom is skeptical. He complains that the quota “restricts the freedom of design of the platforms and the freedom of information of the users”.
YouTube argues primarily with independent creators. A fixed quota would deprive most creators of some of their reach and thus threaten their income. This creates a “two-class society”, i.e. a separation between preferred media offers and everyone else.
According to the draft, preference should be given to content from providers with so-called public value status. ARD, ZDF and Deutschlandradio have this status by law. Private media can apply for status from the state media authorities. In addition to numerous local radio stations, the current list includes RTL, Netflix, Magenta Sport, the Disney Channel as well as “Bild” and “Welt” from Axel Springer.
Media researcher Wolfgang Schulz also criticizes the draft. It leaves it open how the platforms should select from the pool without violating bans on discrimination. “A regulation that does not clearly state what is required will then come under legal pressure.”
Technically, the quota would be “fundamentally implementable,” says Bitkom expert Peveling. However, he considers their effect to be questionable: “Prominent placement does not automatically mean that content will actually be used.”
