NEOS calls for reform of media law regarding online comments

Proposal: Notice-and-Takedown and new cost reimbursement rules

According to a NEOS statement, media, journalists, public figures, and private users are affected by the current regulation. Many of them subsequently deactivate the comment function to avoid the risk of a lawsuit. The party argues that this severely restricts democratic discourse on the internet.

Among other things, NEOS proposes a so-called "notice-and-takedown" principle for comments by third parties. Under this principle, users would not be automatically liable but would have to delete offensive posts upon request. However, those who write the comments or deliberately leave them online despite being notified could be held liable. Wotschke explained: "It should not be the person who does not see and delete a hate comment under their post in the moment who is dragged into expensive proceedings. Rather, it should be the person who writes the hate comments or deliberately leaves hate comments online despite knowing about them and being asked to remove them."

At the same time, NEOS is calling for a reform of cost reimbursement rules. From the party's perspective, the high procedural costs favor abusive litigation models. Anyone involved in a complex legal process can quickly fall into financial difficulties, even if the lawsuit is ultimately unsuccessful. This cost structure should be readjusted in the interest of legal certainty.

Background: Supreme Court decision on a "Like"

Wotschke also emphasized that hate speech online must be consistently prosecuted: "Hate speech online must be consistently prosecuted. Those who insult, threaten, or defame others must be punished." Therefore, the reform should not weaken the prosecution of hate speech and insults, but rather shift responsibility to where it actually lies. In a further statement, she added: "But to hold someone liable with high costs for the misconduct of a third party, about which that person may know nothing, completely misses this goal."

Parallel to the political initiatives, the Austrian judiciary is also dealing with questions of liability on social media. According to an APA report, the Supreme Court (OGH) has made a decision regarding a "Like" under someone else's Facebook post. In the proceedings, a person had written an offensive comment under a family photo; another user had "Liked" this post.

Next Steps: Talks with ÖVP and SPÖ

The account holder, a publicist, subsequently sued for defamation and sought an injunction. The OGH dismissed the application. It ruled that a "Like" should not be considered defamation by default but must always be assessed in its specific context – including the content that was liked, the communication history, and the cultural environment. In the specific case, the OGH interpreted the "Like" as an expression of nonspecific antipathy towards the plaintiff or their publicly staged marital bliss, rather than as a statement damaging to reputation.

NEOS sees the OGH decision as confirmation of its reform demand. The upcoming talks with the ÖVP and SPÖ are intended to clarify how criminal media law can be modernized so that hate speech online is effectively combated, while at the same time no individuals are drawn into expensive proceedings for comments made by others. The goal is a balanced regulation with clear legal certainty for users, the party stated.

The APA report on which this account is based was published on June 5, 2026. Whether and when the reform will actually be debated in the National Council is currently still open.