(11l) Rules to prevent that elections are influenced by unknows
First, I think the EU should have come forward with solutions after public discussions with companies, parliaments and involvement of the public. I think not companies should come forward with their own proposal although of course, they can have internal guidelines.
No, the EU should set rules so all companies and organisations are treated in the same way although a number of scenarios can be available so companies and organisations can choose what suits them most.
Afterwards, companies and organisations need to implement those general rules for their own company (China, although not the best example concerning freedom of expression, illustrates companies can be forced to accept certain rules set by a country) while the public knows what can be expected.
> Thus, in case of private persons, I'm against anonymous comments as people should take responsibility for what they publish although that's not always easy when it concerns oppressive governments that abuse human rights.
Thus, in general people's name or nickname should be linked with their real name during the registration and this should suffice for public persons. The combination of ID card and biometric information can validate the person's identity. The advantage is that fewer people will dare to bully other people and use foul-mouthed language on the internet and thus the internet will become more friendly; those who bully can be found and punished. Of course, companies should be punished if they allow that people are not linked to a certain identity.
As mentioned, in certain dangerous regimes, people's identity may have to be protected whereby (internet) companies disobey rules to avoid people are arrested or worse for having an opinion. But in normal situations, law enforcers should be able when they have a court order to access people's accounts in case they suspect unlawful activities. Thus, rules that companies and organisations must follow should protect the public.
> Concerning companies and organisations, I think it's important to know who is behind ads and thus who ordered or financed the publicity or support a certain politician. Indeed, we also want to know information about companies so we can decide whether or not to invest in or buy products from a company; similar, we also want to know about the people, companies and organisations behind (political) ads and so know how powerful individuals in those companies think. An example are climate change denying ads, based on independent or fossil fuel-sponsored research? And thus people can take informed decisions.
And thus, yes, I think they should either register in individual countries (e.g. smaller companies and organisations may prefer this option because cheaper) or, if preferred, at EU level in case companies and organisations want the same ads in all concerned countries where the EU is registered, e.g. when a company wants to campaign in many countries.
As President Tusk, one of two EU presidents said: may those who voted out burn in a special place in hell. Probably he also thought about those who allowed the referendum to happen as it destabilised the continent. I think that those who allowed that the referendum happened can't do much good in the eyes of many European politicians but also for many Remainers in the UK. And thus, the EU may not be amused to be lectured by Mr Clegg on how to prevent interference by some in European elections.