網路平台時代的假訊息管制──傳統言論自由理論過時了嗎？

Regulating Disinformation in the Online Platform Era: Are Traditional Free Speech Principles Obsolete?

2019年在言論自由史上是具有紀念意義的一年。一百年前，美國聯邦最高法院首次闡釋了聯邦憲法增修條文第1條言論自由的規定。然而，就在這個歷史性的時刻，哥倫比亞大學知名網路法學者Tim Wu教授卻提出了「傳統言論自由的保障是否過時（obsolete）」的質疑。於此同時，假訊息（disinformation）的議題在世界各地引發高度地關注與討論，臺灣也不例外。在2018年底地方選舉後，假訊息的議題，成為優先、重要的施政項目；行政、立法兩院合力通過多部法律的修正，並加大執法的力度，試圖全力防堵假訊息的「危害」。在上述背景下，本文嘗試將網路平台時代的假訊息管制問題分為兩個面向加以討論：其一是政府對於人民言論（特別是傳統新聞媒體報導）的直接管制；其二則是政府對於網路中介者（例如：社群網路）的管制。此二面向的討論，剛好可以進一步檢視與回應Tim Wu教授所提出的相關主張，包括：政府是否仍是言論市場的主要威脅，以及網路平台責任與義務的檢討與建（重）構。受限於篇幅，本文無法針對假訊息的管制問題提出全面性的解決方案，本文寫作的主要目的在於點出政府處理假訊息手段所可能產生的侵害言論自由爭議，藉此提醒各界關注、警戒政府相關管制措施的憲法界限。

In 1919, the US Supreme Court for the first time interpreted the First Amendment of the US Constitution. However, only a century later, Tim Wu, a renowned Internet law scholar, raised the question: Is the First Amendment Obsolete? Meanwhile, the issue of disinformation has been heatedly discussed around the world, and Taiwan has not been an exception. After the 2018 local election, regulating disinformation has become the government’s top priority. Against this background, this article tries to analyze the issue of disinformation regulation in the following two dimensions. First, direct regulation of individuals’speech (especially traditional news reports) by the government. Second, government regulation of Internet intermediaries (e.g., social media). The discussion can help us examine Tim Wu’s arguments, including whether the government is still the main threat to free speech, and whether we should reform the liability regime for online platforms. The purpose of this article is not to propose a comprehensive scheme for regulating disinformation. Instead, it aims to point out that government regulation of disinformation may raise serious free speech concerns, and we should carefully consider the constitutionality of any proposed regulatory measures against disinformation.