@Natanox @echo_pbreyer I may have written on it before, but it was quite some time ago so I can't remember it. She spoke like this about it: "We confronted the respondents".

Except... That's not how you carry out an unbiased opinion poll. The answers you'd get from that would be worthless for determining public opinion.

With the second (new) one, from the publicly available information, they also "confront" respondents with information. From what I've gathered, they don't mention any drawbacks of the proposals, and tries to suggest it will only hit abuse. But, that's just not true, and belies an ignorance of not only recent events, but the past twenty years of internet shenanigans.

They use large dramatic numbers, however without any context. For instance, Facebook reported in 2021 that the majority of apparent reported images were the same ten images duplicated. They also reported that they discovered in an internal study where they sampled x images that many of them were things for "shock" or "humor". This runs counter to the narrative they're trying to push here that it is purely devilish criminals looking to abuse (or exploit) someone.

One question has an answer which refers to online porn among "risks to minors" (this is scientifically dubious) and uses that in a calculation of whether Europeans think online risks are going up. When you look at the results though, you get the impression it's only about child abuse.

The possible answers someone can select in relation to one policy were worded strangely. It was not Yes or No. It was like Yes, the risks will go down. No, the risks will go up. Subtly trying to influence someone to answer a particular way.

If this is any indication of the quality of their surveys, I wouldn't have much confidence in the other either.