Freedom of Speech in the Digital Age – A UN Report

---

In June 2026, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression), Irene Khan, presented to the UN Human Rights Council her final report, titled Freedom of Expression in New Frontiers (A/HRC/62/67). The document was prepared for the 62nd session of the Human Rights Council, held in Geneva from June 15 to July 10, 2026. The report constitutes a summary of the Rapporteur’s mandate and focuses on analyzing the threats to freedom of speech arising from the convergence of the interests of technology corporations and states in the digital age. The document identifies a range of problems in this area, among them arbitrary censorship of content by digital platforms, threats to the safety of children in the digital space, the uncontrolled development of artificial intelligence, and the erosion of states’ sovereignty in the face of pressure from technology corporations.

Technology Corporations as the New Rulers of the Information Space

“O, it is excellent to have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant” — with this line from William Shakespeare’s play Measure for Measure, the substantive part of the report opens.

“Billions of people around the world communicate and access information through digital platforms governed by a small group of billionaire oligarchs, based largely in the United States of America but with global operations,” the report states (para. 4). All of this, in the assessment of the report’s authors, is taking place against the backdrop of “the backsliding of liberal democracies and the rise of authoritarianism” (para. 2) and a rise in phenomena such as “disinformation” and “hate speech” (para. 6).

Later in the document, data is cited on the concentration of power in the hands of major digital platforms and artificial intelligence companies. The Special Rapporteur notes that Meta’s 2025 revenue exceeded the GDP of roughly 130 countries, and that Facebook’s monthly user base of 3 billion people is larger than the population of any single country. The artificial intelligence industry has reached a similar scale — OpenAI’s revenue has surpassed the GDP of 80 countries, and ChatGPT is used by nearly a billion people every week (para. 12).

The report notes that this unprecedented concentration of private power undermines the traditional human rights model, in which states are the duty-bearers responsible for protecting citizens’ rights against corporate abuse. “The line between the regulator and regulated, protector and predator is blurred, especially in contexts where the State itself restricts expression unlawfully,” the Special Rapporteur observes (para. 14).

The document further emphasizes that platforms and artificial intelligence companies effectively shape policy, legislation, and regulation in many countries, with little regard for human rights, transparency, or accountability. The report notes that we are dealing with a new qualitative phenomenon — these corporations control and manipulate, on a massive scale, the very infrastructure of the information space through which states, societies, and individuals inform themselves, communicate, and debate.

Artificial Intelligence as a Threat to Freedom of Opinion

The report also devotes considerable attention to the threats posed by the unchecked development of artificial intelligence. The Special Rapporteur notes that AI algorithms governing the content of information feeds, by steering and determining what is shown to users, raise serious concerns regarding the right to freedom of opinion. AI-powered chatbots take these concerns to an even higher level of risk, possessing — as the report puts it — an “immense ability to shape and manipulate what individuals believe to be ‘real’” (para. 17).

The Special Rapporteur points to growing evidence that interactions with chatbots are leading to serious behavioral changes, delusions, self-harm, and in some cases even suicide (para. 19). In this context, she cites a statement by OpenAI’s Chief Executive Officer, Sam Altman, who publicly admitted that users would develop “somewhat problematic or maybe very problematic parasocial relationships” with chatbots and that “society will have to figure out new guardrails,” adding matter-of-factly that “the upsides will be tremendous.”

In the report’s assessment, the regulatory frameworks governing artificial intelligence remain weak and fragmented. It notes that many governments treat AI primarily as a driver of economic growth, downplaying its risks to people. At the same time, the document underscores that the largest AI companies consistently oppose meaningful oversight, including even modest reporting and transparency requirements.

Erosion of International Law and the Geopolitics of Freedom of Speech

Another problem identified in the report is the erosion of international human rights law and the subordination of freedom of speech to geopolitical interests. The Special Rapporteur notes that the United States plays a particular role in this process, promoting an “absolutist” notion of free speech and redefining the concept of censorship in a manner inconsistent with international human rights law (para. 23).

The document clearly states that the United States is exerting unprecedented political and commercial pressure on other countries over their application of international law. The report notes that the U.S. government sanctioned a justice of Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court over his rulings against U.S. digital platforms operating in Brazil, and has “assailed the European Union with tariffs, subpoenas(…) and travel bans on regulators” in retaliation for the application of the Digital Services Act (para. 24). The Special Rapporteur concludes that “these are not only geopolitical or diplomatic disputes. They are clear signs of rejection of international human rights standards and withdrawal from international cooperation on major human rights issues of global concern” (para. 25).

It is worth noting that the Digital Services Act — the European Union’s flagship regulation, which imposes systemic-risk assessment, algorithmic transparency, and researcher data-access obligations on the largest digital platforms — is treated in the report in an exceptionally cursory manner. Although the Special Rapporteur describes it as “the most developed example of platform regulation” in the world, she devotes only a few paragraphs to it. The document also omits the numerous critical voices raised against the DSA, both from the United States, which regards the regulation as a potential tool for restricting freedom of speech and an unfair trade barrier, and from European experts who point to the risk of excessive discretion on the part of the European Commission in classifying content as harmful, as well as to the lack of genuine judicial oversight of the sanctions it imposes.

The Weaponization of Freedom of Speech

The report identifies three ways in which states restrict freedom of expression. The first is its weaponization — using the rhetoric of free speech to legitimize hate speech and incitement to violence against the most vulnerable.

“Political rhetoric expressing hatred and stigmatizing and vilifying migrants, women, minorities and other marginalized groups has spiked in many parts of the world,” the document states (para. 28). In this context, the Special Rapporteur points to what she sees as a growing political trend of presenting restrictions on hate speech as censorship, while promoting unlimited freedom of speech as a value in itself. She points to the “absolutist” rhetoric of the Trump administration as a central feature of both U.S. domestic and foreign policy, particularly toward Europe and Latin America (para. 30). The Special Rapporteur also notes that the information environment in the United States is deeply polarized, intolerant, and dangerous. Rhetoric from the highest levels of government labels migrants as “animals,” journalists as “enemies,” and peaceful protesters as “terrorists” (para. 31).

From an analytical standpoint, it is worth noting that the Special Rapporteur clearly states that freedom of expression — although a broad right — is not unlimited. “It may be restricted by law that is clear, precise and public,” using measures that are “necessary and proportionate” (para. 33). Any restrictions on freedom of expression must nevertheless be interpreted narrowly — where they are interpreted too broadly, they become a means of censoring lawful speech.

Criminalization of Expression

The second way in which states restrict freedom of speech is by criminalizing it under the guise of protecting national security. The report documents cases of anti-terrorism legislation being used to prosecute legitimate forms of expression in many countries — from Hong Kong to the Philippines to Germany and the United Kingdom.

The Special Rapporteur devotes particular attention to the repression of defenders of Palestinian rights, noting that some measures — such as bans on protests, slogans, and symbols — resemble practices typical of authoritarian states (para. 37). The report also notes that the “security lens” has, in some countries, been applied to sexual orientation and gender identity — citing as an example the 2023 ruling of Russia’s Supreme Court, which designated the “international LGBT movement” as an extremist organization (para. 41).

Shrinking Digital Space

The Special Rapporteur states that the third way in which states restrict freedom of speech is by blocking access to digital spaces. The report notes that global internet freedom has been declining continuously for fifteen years, and that as many as two billion people may be trapped behind “authoritarian firewalls” (para. 43). An increasingly common trend is the shift away from blanket shutdowns toward subtle, precise, large-scale information controls made possible by technological advances.

The report notes that many liberal democracies use digital technologies to restrict and control information in ways that appear innocuous but may be incompatible with their obligations to protect freedom of speech. Digital identification systems and algorithmic governance are extending surveillance into everyday life, raising the cost of speaking freely for those most dependent on the state (para. 46).

Excluding Women from Public Space

The report devotes a separate section to the issue of women’s freedom of speech in the digital space. The Special Rapporteur notes that the internet has become a new battleground for gender equality — expanding women’s opportunities to speak out, while multiplying the risks of online violence and disinformation targeting women.

The report cites research showing that more than 60 percent of organizations working on women’s health have had posts removed by Meta, over half have had posts removed by TikTok, and nearly three-quarters have had ads rejected by Google (para. 54).

The document notes that women are increasingly and effectively using the digital space to raise their voices — the online mobilization of feminist movements and campaigns such as #MeToo has had a significant impact on building public opposition to violence and discrimination based on sex (para. 53). At the same time, the Special Rapporteur approvingly cites the demand from feminist circles that access to information on reproductive and sexual health, and the right to discuss gender identity, should be treated as fundamental free-speech issues on a par with political and religious expression.

Children’s Safety in the Digital Space

The issue of protecting children in the digital environment occupies an important place in the report. The Special Rapporteur notes that one in three users of the digital environment is a child, and that children are exposed to serious harms online — harmful content, cyberbullying, sexual violence, compulsive media use, and violations of data privacy.

Particularly troubling are the findings regarding generative AI systems. The report notes that chatbots capable of forming “parasocial relationships” with children pose a direct threat to their development and well-being. These systems can direct inappropriate content at children or create sexualized images of them — as happened on an alarming scale with xAI’s Grok chatbot (para. 62).

The report makes the important point that the core problem is the fundamental failure of technology companies to design products with children’s safety in mind. States must require companies to guarantee safety by design and age-appropriate protection (para. 63).

Media in Danger

The report describes a deep crisis in the media in the digital age. The Special Rapporteur notes that violence against journalists has reached its highest level in history, and that AI-generated content summaries on search engines are demonetizing and diverting web traffic, seriously affecting media revenue. Financial viability problems affect media in more than 160 countries, driving a global rise in so-called “news deserts” (para. 67).

Digital Oligarchs — Power Without a Mandate and Without Accountability

Later in the report, the monopolistic power of platforms and technology companies and their relationships with states are analyzed. The Special Rapporteur describes a small group of “tech oligarchs” who wield unprecedented informational, sociotechnical, and political power, exercising direct personal control over the digital space without any democratic legitimacy or substantive accountability.

The report identifies Elon Musk, owner of the X platform, as the most ideologically active tech oligarch — a man who publicly identifies himself as a free-speech “absolutist” and opposes content moderation as censorship. The report notes that the startup xAI launched Grokipedia, an encyclopedia created by the Grok chatbot under private control and linked to the X platform. “The same platform deciding what people can see and what is ‘true’ raises serious concerns about information integrity, transparency and accountability, especially when the main shareholder is also directly shaping the platform,” the document states (para. 72).

It is worth noting that X — criticized in the report for the allegedly unchecked shaping of narratives by its owner — remains at the same time one of the least moderated major social media platforms, one on which a broader spectrum of views can be found than on platforms that routinely remove conservative and pro-life content…

Summary

The report of UN Special Rapporteur Irene Khan contains a number of accurate and valuable diagnoses of the threats to freedom of speech in the digital age — particularly regarding the unprecedented concentration of power in the hands of digital platforms, the threats posed to children by artificial intelligence systems, and the pressure exerted by external actors on states’ regulatory sovereignty. On the other hand, the phenomenon of censorship itself is analyzed selectively — the report focuses almost exclusively on the restriction of progressive content, while overlooking the growing removal by platforms of conservative, religious, and pro-life content.

See also:

• A Ban on “Pathostreaming”: Another Pretext for Internet Censorship in Poland
• A Young Pregnant Mother Has Stood Trial. Soon Any of Us Could Fall Victim to Censorship
• Not Only the DSA: Systemic Threats to Freedom of Speech and the Integrity of Democratic Elections in the EU
• Bill Implementing EU’s Digital Services Act Vetoed by Polish President, Citing Arguments Put Forward by Ordo Iuris
• Who Will Check Social Media? Answer: Those on the European Commission’s List of “Trusted Flaggers”

Source of cover photo: iStock