BIG SISTER IS WATCHING? En argumentationsanalys av den svenska debatten om ”Chat Control”

Abstract

The Swedish debate regarding chat control highlights a value conflict between protecting the safety of children and preserving democratic rights such as privacy and freedom of expression. This thesis examines key arguments for and against the proposed EU CSAM-regulation, analyzing them through a normative argumentation analysis method. The analysis is based on the Swedish constitution, representing the common values of Swedish society. The study reconstructs arguments from four debate articles and evaluate them according to their relevance and validity, which makes up the arguments’ total evidential strength. Supporters of the legislation argue that there is a need to combat sexual abuse of children and stop the spreading of child pornographic materials, and that the need for a coherent EU-legislation is evident. Opponents, however, argue that the proposal risks normalizing mass surveillance and therefore undermining fundamental democratic rights. The analysis reveals that both sides present compelling, yet flawed arguments. The overall evidential for both sides are moderate. The study contributes to a broader discussion on a very current debate; how to balance security and fundamental rights.