Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.03601 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866910929705238528 |
|---|---|
| author | Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Gsenger, Rita Dahlgren, Scott Wagner, Ben |
| author_facet | Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Gsenger, Rita Dahlgren, Scott Wagner, Ben |
| contents | A central requirement of the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) is that online platforms undergo internal and external audits. A key component of these audits is the assessment of systemic risks, including the dissemination of illegal content, threats to fundamental rights, impacts on democratic processes, and gender-based violence. The DSA Delegated Regulation outlines how such audits should be conducted, setting expectations for both platforms and auditors. This article evaluates the strengths and limitations of different qualitative and quantitative methods for auditing these systemic risks and proposes a mixed-method approach for DSA compliance. We argue that content sampling, combined with legal and empirical analysis, offers a viable method for risk-specific audits. First, we examine relevant legal provisions on sample selection for audit purposes. We then assess sampling techniques and methods suitable for detecting systemic risks, focusing on how representativeness can be understood across disciplines. Finally, we review initial systemic risk assessment reports submitted by platforms, analyzing their testing and sampling methodologies. By proposing a structured, mixed-method approach tailored to specific risk categories and platform characteristics, this article addresses the challenge of evidence-based audits under the DSA. Our contribution emphasizes the need for adaptable, context-sensitive auditing strategies and adds to the emerging field of DSA compliance research. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2505_03601 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Doing Audits Right? The Role of Sampling and Legal Content Analysis in Systemic Risk Assessments and Independent Audits in the Digital Services Act Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Gsenger, Rita Dahlgren, Scott Wagner, Ben Computers and Society A central requirement of the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) is that online platforms undergo internal and external audits. A key component of these audits is the assessment of systemic risks, including the dissemination of illegal content, threats to fundamental rights, impacts on democratic processes, and gender-based violence. The DSA Delegated Regulation outlines how such audits should be conducted, setting expectations for both platforms and auditors. This article evaluates the strengths and limitations of different qualitative and quantitative methods for auditing these systemic risks and proposes a mixed-method approach for DSA compliance. We argue that content sampling, combined with legal and empirical analysis, offers a viable method for risk-specific audits. First, we examine relevant legal provisions on sample selection for audit purposes. We then assess sampling techniques and methods suitable for detecting systemic risks, focusing on how representativeness can be understood across disciplines. Finally, we review initial systemic risk assessment reports submitted by platforms, analyzing their testing and sampling methodologies. By proposing a structured, mixed-method approach tailored to specific risk categories and platform characteristics, this article addresses the challenge of evidence-based audits under the DSA. Our contribution emphasizes the need for adaptable, context-sensitive auditing strategies and adds to the emerging field of DSA compliance research. |
| title | Doing Audits Right? The Role of Sampling and Legal Content Analysis in Systemic Risk Assessments and Independent Audits in the Digital Services Act |
| topic | Computers and Society |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.03601 |