CHILE

On December 14, the Committee on Future Challenges, Science, Technology and Innovation, chaired by Senator Guido Girardi (Partido por la Democracia – opposition), continued the discussion in general of the bill that seeks to regulate digital platforms. It should be recalled that this committee had already expressed itself in favor of the proposal, but in the plenary a request was presented to deepen the analysis of its content before proceeding to its vote.

Among those invited to the meeting were the following persons:

• Pedro Vaca, Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
• Dr. Karen Herrera-Ferrá, president of the Mexican Association of Neuroethics AC.
• José Manuel Muñoz, neurobiologist and philosopher of the University of Navarra, member of the Ibero-American Society of Neuroethics.

Vaca argued that the region is at a turning point in terms of freedom of expression on the Internet, “which extends to democratic conditions, the quality of public debate, the control of public and private subjects, consumer rights, the democratic limits of corporate power, the scope of economies of care, the generation of addictions and mental health, and business models based on predictive behavior,” among other aspects.

For his part, Herrera referred to the reality of digital globalization, with its implications in terms of the construction of a global market. He estimated that this market has the capacity to shape needs, preferences, expectations and decision making, as well as the different ideologies, cognitive processes and ethical systems in the face of “a deep and massive human interconnectivity”.

Finally, José Muñoz considered that the present situation that the initiative seeks to regulate is the product of “not having known how to be prudent and energetic” previously, which entails risks associated with laboratory neuromarketing with reach to homes, the greater precision in the prediction of digital behaviors enhanced by the synergy of neurodata, and the relationship between emotions and manipulation as in the case of “fake news”.

It should be remembered that the discussion in general assumes that the legislators express their will to advance in an eventual regulation on the subject and it is followed by the ratification on the floor, before the committee can proceed with the discussion of each of the points. It is only in this last instance that the legislators can make proposals for amendments to the text.