Multilayered democracy, media freedom and online platforms

  • Claes Granmar Stockholm University, Sweeden
Keywords: rule of law, democracy, media freedom, political advertising, online platforms

Abstract

Paradoxically, the EU which is a sui generis polity largely based on intergovernmental cooperation and supranational bureaucracy, has become the main guarantor of democracy in Europe. In 2025, the European Democracy Shield was adopted to reinforce situational awareness, strengthen democratic institutions and boosting social resilience and citizen’s engagement. As the Union lacks unambiguous powers to protect forms of governance, the shield consists mainly of frameworks for collaboration between national authorities and EU institutions. However, the Union’s competences to establish and maintain an internal market has become a route to promote informed opinion-formation which is the very foundation for democracy. Within the scope of EU law, the EU institutions as well as the national norm giving powers must always take fundamentalrights and interests recognised in the EU Charter into account. Primarily the freedom of expression and information enshrined in Article11 of the EU Charter is, therefore, transposed into the regulation of media and platform services within the Union. It is a delicate matter to reconcile on the one hand the right to freely receive and impart information including media freedom and pluralism, and on the other hand to repress disinformation and protect the integrity and relevance of media providers acting under editorial responsibility. Indeed, a primary objective of the Democracy Shield is to protect against foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) in electoral as well as in legislative processes. Hence, the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and the Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising Act (TTPA) which took effect in 2025, are important components of the Shield. Since platform providers are in most instances not media service providers, they are instead subject to the legal and institutional framework established by the Digital Service Act (DSA). On occasion, conduct by platform providers can also be considered anticompetitive and infringe the Digital Markets Act (DMA) formedia content providers and social-media platform providers. In this contribution, the interrelations between the relevant legal frameworks are explored. As an overall theme the reconceptualization of democracy within the EU, from being merely a matter of parliamentary majority to being anchored in fundamental rights, is discussed.

Received: 19 January 2026 
Accepted: 5 February 2026

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Claes Granmar, Stockholm University, Sweeden

Dr. Claes Granmar was appointed as a senior lecturer at Stockholm University, Faculty of Law in 2012, and has been an associate professor in European Law there since 2017. Dr. Granmar defended his thesis at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, Italy, in 2010, where he is also an alumnus. During the academic years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 he was a visiting fellow at the Institute for European and Comparative Law (IECL) at Oxford University. As a member of the Senior Common Room of the Lady Margereth Hall College he also became an alumnus of Oxford University. Moreover, in 2019 Dr. Granmar was an Honorary Fellow of Melbourne Law School. He has earlier been a trainee at the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Court. Dr. Granmar is director of the undergraduate course in European Law at Stockholm University. Furthermore, he is the director of two elective courses at advanced level; European Procedural Law; and European Union External Trade Relations Law and Policy. Dr. Granmar is the founder and director of the Nordic Forum for European Convention Studies and head of the renowned Nordic Human Rights Moot Court Competition.

Published
2026-05-28
How to Cite
Granmar, Claes. 2026. “Multilayered Democracy, Media Freedom and Online Platforms”. Deusto Journal of European Studies, no. 74 (May), 59-104. https://doi.org/10.18543/ced.3483.