‘Emergency Media Law’ throughout the Three Crises: The Evolution of ‘Fake News’ Towards an Ambiguous Normalization?

In last years, ‘fake news’ have occupied the media law debate, the need for controlling the reliability of the news published on the Web and on social media being raised with increasing urgency. During the Russian crisis, Commission Head von der Leyen expressed the will that Russian editors be banned, which Youtube and others promptly executed. Then, one is led to ask whether her statement marks a turning point in the story of ‘fake news’. Three points deserve attention. One: the initial formulation of the concept between ontology & convenience, and its (dubious) constitutional consistency. Second: the idea that ‘fake’ is rather what carries alternative views of crucial controversial events. Third: von der Leyen’s statement reveals subscription to the ‘fake-partisan’ equivalence, which denies the irenic Western narrative of a generally accepted ‘truth’. Conclusively, the concept definitely dismisses its ontology and calls for new consideration in light of supreme constitutional values.