Checked against delivery

The global tech companies must take greater responsibility

Thank you for the invitation!
 
It’s good to be in Lillehammer, a city of winter sports and literature, a centre for freedom of expression and democracy – in beautiful Gudbrandsdalen – and close to where Norwegian Nobel Laureate Sigrid Undset wrote her historical novels. – She was a strong Norwegian voice of expression – touching on emotional and existential living conditions of Norwegians – long before we had anything so beautiful and complex as a democracy!
 
A particular welcome to another Nobel Laureate – this time for peace – Maria A. Ressa.
 
Let me, at the outset reiterate how much I admire her tireless effort for principled democracy, human rights and freedom of expression.
 
As a member of Parliament back then, I had the privilege to nominate her for the Nobel Peace Prize of 2021. – That she was awarded the prize that year, was a strong sense of the Nobel Committee's sound judgement – a recognition of what editors, journalists and free speech means for truth, democracy and ultimately for peace.

Maria Ressa lifts the struggle – at personal high risk – to another level than most of us would ever dare to do.
 
I made the appeal of inviting her to this conference after I heard her speak at the UN General Assembly in New York last September – and I am so happy that she accepted our invitation.

Maria said to world leaders from the UN rostrum, in a very clear language; “Without facts, there is no truth. Without truth, there is no trust. Without these three, we have no shared reality, we can’t have journalism, we can’t have democracy”.

It is perhaps the best sum-up of realities that we face today – and a clarion call for understanding, and then taking action, as best as we can.

She is demonstrating and illustrating what is at stake – with the technological changes driving societal change – with social media offering opportunities – but also occupying hearts and minds in almost all spheres. – And what does all that to democracy? Human rights? Freedom of expression? Ownership to public goods?

The key words. – Facts. Truth. And trust.

Here we are – and we will listen to Maria Ressa in a while.

Defend the democratic institutions

Let me – before I enter into my theme – refer to another inspirational and strong voice that has meant a lot to my own thinking – Professor Timothy Snyder, an American professor, and his writings – on what threatens democracy today – and the need to stand up against totalitarian and authoritarian rule, and what politics can do about it – and, very important; what you and me can do as individuals. – Because sometimes we feel ‘small’.

I will – as I often do – highlight his book “On Tyranny. Twenty Lessons From the 20th Century” from 2017. Let me share with you four of these lessons at the outset of this conference:

His first lesson is this: “Don’t obey in advance” – and he explains: “A citizen who adapted (to authoritarian tendencies) is teaching power what it can do”.

I believe that Maria Ressa is a living example of someone who is following this advice; she is not obeying – and shame is giving her a dire warning about what it means, what follows, if we do so, if we do obey.

Snyder’s second lesson is this one: “Defend institutions”, and he explains: “It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Institutions do not protect themselves. So, choose an institution you care about—a court, a newspaper, a law, a labour union—and take its side”.

In short, friends: Defend democratic institutions! Defend free speech! That – I believe – is why we are here.

Let me then refer to two more of his lessons – precisely because they address all of us as individuals; Prime Ministers or editors or whatever. We cannot stand at the side-lines and think that only the big structures will fix it. 

Lesson number 12: “Make eye contact and small talk” – and Snyder argues: “This is not just polite. It is part of being a citizen and a responsible member of society”.

So, think about that for the rest of the conference when you’re having your coffee out in the hall: See and talk to people who you know – and who you don’t know.

Just think about it for a moment – where are we looking when we are walking, or reading at the bus, or waiting in line? We look at our smartphones, we don’t catch the eyes of other people.

And let me also quote his final lesson, number 20: “Be as courageous as you can” – I love that – and with the final line: “If none of us is prepared to die for freedom, then all of us will die under tyranny”. It’s a pretty dire message.

It makes me think of Maria Ressa – and her inspiration to all of us.

Friends,
The scope of this conference – “The Freedom to disagree” – is vast. And this session’s title is “Disagreement drives democracy”.

By the way, I am in the middle of this (disagreement) – I can tell you; I am leading a minority government, so disagreement is ‘my bread and butter’. – And I have a lot of it. But – there is a way, you know, and that is the fascinating thing about democracy; there is a way.

I will primarily focus on two themes in this context:

Firstly, in many countries today, democracy, human rights, and freedom of expression are really at stake.

From my vantage point as Prime Minister, I will reflect on Norway’s democracy. – And our building blocks, strengths, and the challenges coming from the technological development. We have our flaws, our shortcomings, so let us not shy away from them.

Secondly, I will comment on how we can meet the threats and the opportunities today – concerning freedom of expression – from technology, including AI, and social media. And then, at the end, a little warning: How does hate speech and extremism weaken democracy – right now, today?

Democracy’s building blocks

So, my first point, on democracy; how to keep, support and strengthen it.

A key conference at the University of Oslo addressed this a few weeks ago – that I attended; how do we fare as a democracy? There are ways to measure this; how does the democracy perform.

We progress, in Norway – with some flaws – but also with a high degree of resilience. This is what academic research tells us.

With resilience comes room for disagreements. And as you all know, disagreement drives democracy.

At the same time, I would add that healthy disagreement needs trust between people, and also respect shown between opponents. – And Ingunn (Trosholmen) referred to this, and also the mayor, at the beginning, and I often like to quote that in Norway we have political opponents – I have a few, I can tell you – but I do not have enemies, in our political landscape.

People who trust each other make eye contact, and I can tell you; I can make eye contact with all my political opponents, and that is actually a strength.

The V-Dem Institute – you’ll hear from them later – shows how democracy struggles globally, and that authoritarianism is on the rise. This is a change from the 1990s and the early part of this century – when democracy was on the rise. These are very worrying trends.

Liberal democracies are the least common regime type in the world. – Think about that. The way we live in Norway is not a typical political system. Nearly 3 out of 4 persons live in autocracies.

At the same time, the democracy in Norway is doing quite well. Democracy is strong. – And I believe that we are ready to defend our institutions.

The challenge, however, as Maria Ressa has written about: Modern threats may come at unknown fronts – and make damage without us seeing and understanding how – especially from a new media, social media, as all the algorithms operating on the world wide web penetrating all the fibres of democracies – while we look in another direction.

So – what are the components of democracy that we should not take for granted?

Local democracy

One obvious quality, and we do not always think about it: All politics is local. – You just heard the mayor and also the former Mayor of Lillehammer. This is a very strong municipality in this country.

A great strength of the Norwegian democracy is that our local democracy – with roots almost 200 years back in time – holds the line. And, actually, our local democracy was developed before we became a sovereign state – since we were under the King of Sweden who ruled the ‘big questions’ and he left to the municipalities to deal with the smaller issues – which are often in people’s lives the big issues. – So, the local democracy became a ‘democracy school’ in my nation’s history.

Today, we have a solid, democratic municipal sector in Norway, in charge of delivering key services to people in our welfare state.

A large number of people participate in governance at local level. And that is not always easy; the economy is tight, the tasks are big, the population is aging, the kids are needing care, and so on. A lot is decided locally.

They learn to disagree, and to find compromises. They learn that politics – that democracy – has to deliver.

And this is the ultimate test: Democratic resilience is not built just in one sector or at one level alone. Local democracy is near you – and it builds trust.

And the local media is a watch-dog, as they should be.

Trust

Another key component of Norway’s democracy is that we have a high level of trust. It is hard to measure – but a lot of research is done on this.

It is worthwhile recalling, that all the while the focus in the media is on the disagreements and shortcomings; still 7 out of 10 people in Norway have a high level of trust in other people.

People also have a high level of trust in institutions like the Parliament, Government, the Judiciary and the media.

A high level of trust is an important part of keeping the population resilient – in times of crisis – and when we made the first National Security Strategy last year, we defined “A strong democracy” as one of Norway’s fundamental security interests.

Trust is also the most important component of what is called social capital – the glue of society. And – think about it; financial capital, human capital, real estate etc. can be measured in kroner or dollars, but the most important capital, social capital, trust, cannot be measures in money.

Trust is when we let our children play outdoor alone with other children. Trust is shown when fences with locked gates are rarely seen at our schools.

But a warning here: I sometimes ask myself if the mobile phone and the Air pods – in my ears – make us shy away from making eye contact – remember Snyder’s key lessons. I think there is a trust element here that is at stake. 

For us in government it is – of course – our prime job to earn trust: If we do not deliver, trust weakens; we lose and we leave offices.

In order to earn trust, we must deliver. We must create real change and security in people’s lives. On jobs, decent salaries, costs of living, healthcare, etc.

What has happened in America in the last decades: Democracy has not delivered for ordinary people. No change in their purchasing power since decades – and ‘the glue’ is weakening. People want a good life. And that the progress of society is shared fairly.

Now, even though trust in democratic institutions is high in Norway, even though electoral turnout is almost 80 %, at the last election, a year ago, we should ask ourselves:

Who are these remaining 20 %? Why are they outside? You are free not to vote, but if 20 % find it not worthwhile to go voting, why is that?

This is key to me: The biggest danger to any individual is to end up concluding: I am outside. I don’t belong. When that happens, it dramatic for the individual, but it is also very dramatic for the community.

We see it from all statistics; the young adolescents that end up committing crime, they come predominantly from vulnerable and resource weak families and communities. – We fail to offer them communities that reassure, inspire and include.

The key, of course, is prevention, which is so much better than cure. Perhaps the most important – and complex – task of a government – is really to reach and include all.

And with the tech and social media we have another element of polarization and division that risk keeping people on the outside.

Engagement

Another building-block of Norway’s democracy is the flora of political parties, their central role, and the public engagement also in other organizations.

The political parties have traditionally been a ‘sandpit’ for future politicians, from youth and onwards. – Where people interested in politics have received training.

The parties’ local branches are important when seats in the Parliament are to be won.

And the fact that ordinary people’s involvement is strong, is another building-block of our democratic institutions, and the democratic resilience. Because: Engagement really fuels democracy.

With small and large, local and national, we have over 62,000 civil society organizations in Norway. Again: Engagement fuels social capital.

It means that people take their share of responsibility; participating in society, mobilizing for a cause.

Challenges

So – friends, is everything perfect here in Norway? Of course not. Here are some of our challenges:

How to reach those who rarely or never vote in elections – as I mentioned, but more than that; the ones and particularly the young ones who risk to fall outside the community, they formally have a freedom of expression – but they don’t find it meaningful to use it.

How to resist all the driving forces towards more inequality? – Because, as we all know: Growing economic inequalities create distrust in political institutions.

How to deal with unwanted election influence? Norway – as other countries – is a target for foreign intelligence services, trying to push ahead of elections, and push into the corners of decision-making.

How do deal with disinformation and fake news – creating confusion, distrust and weakened democratic processes?

And looking into the larger, international context – the challenge picture is bigger:

We see increasing polarization and deep, hostile divisions between parties and social groups. Norway is not immune to these phenomena either.

And we see populist rhetoric which undermines democratic norms and the rule of law. Reducing trust among ourselves and in our democratic institutions are – I believe – among the most important threats to our national security.

Global tech companies

Friends, this leads as a bridge to my second point – and closely linked to the state of the democracy:

On how technology – including AI – and social media – have an impact on freedom of expression, and also on hate speech and threats. – Threats to our democracy.

Today, the conditions for public debate are changing rapidly – it is hard to measure – also in Norway: Artificial intelligence, social media and powerful algorithms shape a new landscape. – And it affects journalism. Many of you are journalists – and you know this.

And right now, when the tech giants scoop up knowledge from the whole array of human experience, everything any journalist has ever written or delivered – putting it into their chat boots – something profound may be happening.

A small number of global tech companies have great influence on what people see, what spreads, and what societies pay attention to.

The whole economic eco-system of our media is changing with the big tech companies scooping in vast parts of the ads that used to fund traditional media.

And as we all know – the digital platforms are designed to maximize attention. This in turn rewards polarization and conflict – rather than reflection and dialogue.

Extremism

I am also very concerned with the growing trend – of all this, leading to young adults becoming radicalized. Digital platforms serve as their primary arena for information and recruitment.

Norwegians know and some of our guests may know that we had a horrible encounter with extremism with the terror attack in Norway on 22 July 2011 – where a young man shot and killed government officials in Oslo and the youth at a summer camp at Utøya – a young Norwegian was behind it – fuelled by a radicalized community on the internet.

I remember, back then – and some of us thought: This will be an eye-opener, we will be more aware, we will limit this – and everybody will understand the threat. But the opposite has happened.

Last Friday before the weekend, I visited the Norwegian Police Headquarters and saw how they now venture into the internet to fight the cover of modern crime – in all the dark corners of the net – from petty crime to violence promotion and political extremism.

This is extremely dangerous and worrying.

We are now establishing a Centre for the Study of Extremism. We will do the hard work and learn from the darkest chapters – in order to be better at prevention.

Last year, my government presented a White Paper on Prevention of Extremism, introducing a number of measures. Now, it is up to us to follow up.

Measures range from more information-sharing across public sectors – like police, schools, health institutions – to building stronger democratic resilience.

Freedom of expression cannot mean freedom from responsibility.

Regulations

So, I asked Maria Ressa recently; we cannot dis-invent technology, it is there; tech giants or new internet connections, they are there. What can we do?

Maria’s answer was this: You must regulate.

Well, yes, thank you for that advice. – Democratic societies have the right and responsibility to regulate digital environments that affect public safety, democratic resilience, and the wellbeing of children and young people.

And we will, friends. But we learn that as much as the internet is global and without borders, our measures must be cross-border in the widest sense. It is obvious.

But at the same time so complex – to even imagine that the US and China will take responsibility together. And so on. So, it is a vast global undertaking and we have to start making progress on this regulation.

And then I will also say: You – the tech companies must take greater responsibility for the consequences of the digital systems that you create.

Platforms must be more transparent about how algorithms work.

They must be more accountable for harmful manipulation and the protection of children.

We need firmer regulatory approach. – But I prefer, as we do in all sectors, to have a dialogue with the ones concerned and find the best way to do it and agree on what we want to do.

Norway will implement into Norwegian Law: The EU’s Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act and the AI Act. These will establish stronger democratic oversight.

They will increase transparency and improve protection against harmful, illegal content.

They will also place clearer obligations on the companies shaping the digital public sphere.

It is high time – and let me make one remark directly aimed at the tech companies: You must behave as responsible citizens.

I acknowledge that you see yourself as global citizens; free from national boundaries and regulations. But that cannot be all.

Let me make a reference: Imagine that you want to open a restaurant here in Lillehammer, then you have some key responsibilities. You need to secure the place against fires. There are regulations as to the serving of alcohol and there are age regulations.

And if you should discover that someone in your restaurant does something illegal inside your facilities, selling drugs for example, you are obliged to inform the police.

Within these regulations, we are free to enter that restaurant, have fun, be with our friends, and have a good time.

So, how is this on the internet – at the different social media locations that invite us in – all the way to the darker corners?

I find the contrast between the obligations we expect from the restaurant owner to be illustrative.

We have a full enough picture to state that very illegal things are offered, pushed and exchanged on the internet.

In the US, the biggest tech companies are facing lawsuits, charging their responsibilities for young peoples’ deaths and injuries, after mass explosion to their internet connections.

All too often, these companies respond; “we only offer the access and the services; then is up to people to behave” – and they even have the guts to say: “This is purely freedom of expression!”

As if the restaurant was saying – “you can do whatever you like, there are no regulations.” You could never open a restaurant in Lillehammer with that attitude. Police would come and close your place.

So, today, my message is this:

We need to unite – governments, civil societies, decent media – and hold tech companies responsible. Full stop.

And this, dear friends, must be an international effort. The G7 countries could play an important role. First chance is at their summit in France in a few weeks.

It will take courage. It will take thousands of ‘Maria Ressas’ to drive this effort. – Let us all stand up and be counted!

Artificial intelligence

Finally,

A few remarks on: Talking about AI; should we be worried? Some obvious challenges are:

AI lowers the costs and increases the speed of producing so-called political content, including fake articles or election disinformation campaigns.

Only large tech companies can make advanced AI systems. – Which again leads to concentration of power – normally not a good thing for a vibrant democracy.

Furthermore, AI-driven recommendation systems optimize engagement – which means more echo chambers, polarization, and distrust.

If AI systems are capable of targeting people’s behaviour, we may ask: Are citizens freely forming their opinions? Will people withdraw from online debates?

But then, of course, AI also offers immense opportunities, by all means.

Wider access to information, translation and accessibility tools, support for civic participation, and improved government services. We have great ambitions on this.

Social media

But one of the most urgent digital challenges we face, in all of this, is the impact of social media on children.

I have visited many families and schools in Norway expressing their concern. In my government’s Plan for Norway; we have lifted one group, one population group as a priority; and that is about securing our children and adolescents.

Children grow up in digital environments designed by the world’s most powerful companies, aiming at maximizing their screen dependency.

It is not a fair battle between a 10-years old brain and a thousand of the world’s most advanced tech brains that aim at creating life-lasting dependencies to the tech platforms.

Parents and schools cannot carry this responsibility all on their own.

In Norway, we have taken mobile phones and smart phones out of schools.

Some said it could not be done, but it has gone very well, even without formal legislation – and one of my biggest joys is meeting 14-year-olds who say that a day at school without their mobile is just fine.

Now, we’ll go one step further, into far more complex terrain: We propose a minimum age limit of 16 years for the use of certain social media platforms. Norway is not the only country – I hope more will follow.

Societies have always accepted that children need particular safeguards in environments that may affect their health, development and safety. We cannot leave this field behind.

The same principle should apply in the digital world.

Hate speech

Friends, let me end on a specific issue of concern, a closely related issue; namely the phenomena of hate speech.

One thing is the democratic right to disagree – and I talked about having opponents, not enemies – and even the necessity of disagreement.

However, hate speech, incitements and threats are a completely different matter.

Norwegian friends know that my Labour Party Youth leader, Gaute Skjervø, receives hateful messages that would normally drive anybody out of engagement. And also other youth politicians are subject to threats.

And, I just made reference to what we now see – direct violence promotion aimed at our very young. – Unacceptable and dangerous!

So let me say this clearly: Threats and incitements to violence are completely unacceptable.

It is intolerable when politicians, especially young ones, often women, experience threats in their daily lives.

Democracy is weakened if voices choose to stay silent – out of fear. Or if politicians avoid certain topics.

I am reacting strongly to this, and the government has a number of measures in place, including;

  • the police are strengthening their efforts on hate speech,
  • increased funding to movements like “Stop Hate Speech”, and the 22 July Centre, and other peace and human rights centres,
  • more research and knowledge,
  • we follow-up on our action plans against various forms of racism and discrimination,
  • and at schools, we are strengthening attitude-building, as well as developing good digital skills.

And, as I said, we must hold social media accountable and raise our demands on them.

Dear friends – in conclusion,

‘Reporters Without Borders’ recently ranked Norway No. 1 on World Press Freedom Index for the 10th consecutive year.

I appreciate that, but it should not make us complacent. Still, it is a rank worth protecting. 

It should not make us forget that there are challenges, like threats and harassments against journalists, particularly those with minority backgrounds. Maria Ressa knows all about that.

In the end, supporting journalism is supporting democracy itself.

If the foundations of public discourse erode – through weakened media and weakened trust – we risk the very conditions that make a democratic government possible.

So, we need to work together, across borders, to trust that;

  • the elections are legitimate,
  • the public debate is authentic,
  • that evidence matters,
  • that the institutions are held accountable,
  • and that fellow citizens are real participants in good faith.  

In other words, and I quote Maria Ressa again: “Without facts, there is no truth. Without truth, there is no trust. Without these three, we have no shared reality”.

And all of this is linked to one underlying democratic requirement: trust.

Welcome to Lillehammer and thank you!

More information on the conference: