A war of words has erupted between the EU and Elon Musk, over alleged EU attempts to blackmail X into secretly censoring free speech.
Elon Musk claims EU offered an ‘illegal secret deal’ as X charged with DSA breaches
David Walsh Sat 13 July 2024 at 4:37 AM AEST
Elon Musk has hit out at the European Commission, claiming it tried to make an “illegal secret deal” with X over compliance with new EU rules to prevent online misinformation.
It comes as the Commission announced on Friday that Musk’s social media platform, formerly known as Twitter, had breached elements of the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
“The European Commission offered X an illegal secret deal: if we quietly censored speech without telling anyone, they would not fine us,” the billionaire tech mogul posted on X.
The European Commission offered 𝕏 an illegal secret deal: if we quietly censored speech without telling anyone, they would not fine us.
“Today we issue, for the first time, preliminary findings under the Digital Services Act,” Margrethe Vestager, a senior official at the European Commission, said in a statementFriday. “In our view, X does not comply with the DSA in key transparency areas, by using dark patterns and thus misleading users, by failing to provide an adequate ad repository, and by blocking access to data for researchers.”
The company’s approach to so-called verified accounts “does not correspond to industry practice and deceives users,” the European Union’s executive arm added in the statement. Anyone can subscribe to obtain the “verified” status, it noted, and pointed to evidence of “malicious actors” abusing the blue check “to deceive users.”
If the Commission’s preliminary findings are confirmed, it could impose a fine on X of up to 6% of its globalannual turnover.
Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act
The European Commission has opened formal proceedings to assess whether X may have breached the Digital Services Act (DSA) in areas linked to risk management, content moderation, dark patterns, advertising transparency and data access for researchers.
On the basis of the preliminary investigation conducted so far, including on the basis of an analysis of the risk assessment report submitted by X in September, X’s Transparency report published on 3 November, and X’s replies to a formal request for information, which, among others, concerned the dissemination of illegal content in the context of Hamas’ terrorist attacks against Israel, the Commission has decided to open formal infringement proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act.
The proceedings will focus on the following areas:
The compliance with the DSA obligations related to countering the dissemination of illegal content in the EU, notably in relation to the risk assessment and mitigation measures adopted by X to counter the dissemination of illegal content in the EU, as well as the functioning of the notice and action mechanism for illegal content in the EU mandated by the DSA, including in light of X’s content moderation resources.
The effectiveness of measures taken to combat information manipulation on the platform, notably the effectiveness of X’s so-called ‘Community Notes’ system in the EU and the effectiveness of related policies mitigating risks to civic discourse and electoral processes.
The measures taken by X to increase the transparency of its platform. The investigation concerns suspected shortcomings in giving researchers access to X’s publicly accessible data as mandated by Article 40 of the DSA, as well as shortcomings in X’s ads repository.
A suspected deceptive design of the user interface, notably in relation to checkmarks linked to certain subscription products, the so-called Blue checks.
If proven, these failures would constitute infringements of Articles 34(1), 34(2) and 35(1), 16(5) and 16(6), 25(1), 39 and 40(12) of the DSA. The Commission will now carry out an in-depth investigation as a matter of priority. The opening of formal infringement proceedings does not prejudge its outcome.
These are the first formal proceedings launched by the Commission to enforce the first EU-wide horizontal framework for online platforms’ responsibility, just 3 years from its proposal.
Next Steps
After the formal opening of proceedings, the Commission will continue to gather evidence, for example by sending additional requests for information, conducting interviews or inspections.
The opening of formal proceedings empowers the Commission to take further enforcement steps, such as interim measures, and non-compliance decisions. The Commission is also empowered to accept any commitment made by X to remedy on the matters subject to the proceeding.
The DSA does not set any legal deadline for bringing formal proceedings to an end. The duration of an in-depth investigation depends on a number of factors, including the complexity of the case, the extent to which the company concerned cooperate with the Commission and the exercise of the rights of defence.
The opening of formal infringement proceedings does not prejudge its outcome. It relieves Digital Services Coordinators, or any other competent authority of EU Member States, of their powers to supervise and enforce the DSA in relation to the suspected infringements of Articles 16(5), 16(6) and 25(1).
Background
X (formerly known as Twitter) has been designated as a Very Large Online Platform (VLOP) on 25 April 2023 under the EU’s Digital Services Act, following its declaration of having 112 million monthly active users in the EU as reported to the Commission on 17 February 2023.
As a VLOP, since four months from its designation, X has had to comply with a series of obligations set out in the DSA. In particular:
Pursuant to Articles 34(1), 34(2) and 35(1), VLOPs are obliged to diligently identify, analyse, and assess any systemic risks in the Union stemming from the design or functioning of their service and its related systems, or from the use made of their services. When conducting risk assessments, VLOPs shall take into account a number of factors that influence the systemic risks, including recommender systems, advertising systems or the intentional manipulation of the service, including through inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, as well as the amplification and potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions. VLOPs are obliged to put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified.
Pursuant to Articles 16(5) and 16(6), online platforms have to notify without undue delay individuals or entities of content moderation decision, providing information on the possibilities for redress in respect of that decision; platforms shall take such decisions in a timely, diligent, non-arbitrary and objective manner.
Pursuant to Article 25(1), online platforms shall not design, organise or operate their online interfaces in a way that deceives or manipulates their users or in a way that otherwise materially distorts or impairs the ability of the users of their service to make free and informed decisions.
Pursuant to Article 39, VLOPs have to compile and make publicly available through a searchable and reliable tool a repository containing advertisements on their platforms, until one year after the advertisement was presented for the last time, in a way that the information is accurate and complete.
Pursuant to Article 40(12), VLOPs have to provide researchers with effective access to platform data.
More information on this investigation will be available on the Commission’s website.
The higher the risk large platforms pose to our society, the more specific the requirements of the Digital Services Act are. We take any breach of our rules very seriously. And the evidence we currently have is enough to formally open a proceeding against X. The Commission will carefully investigate X’s compliance with the DSA, to ensure European citizens are safeguarded online – as the regulation mandates.
Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President for a Europe Fit for the Digital Age
Today’s opening of formal proceedings against X makes it clear that, with the DSA, the time of big online platforms behaving like they are “too big to care” has come to an end. We now have clear rules, ex ante obligations, strong oversight, speedy enforcement, and deterrent sanctions and we will make full use of our toolbox to protect our citizens and democracies. We will now start an in-depth investigation of X’s compliance with the DSA obligations concerning countering the dissemination and amplification of illegal content and disinformation in the EU, transparency of the platforms and design of the user interface.
How could the USA be caught in this alleged censorship blackmail attempt?
Even if Elon Musk attempts to ring fence X.com content in Europe, and apply European censorship laws only to users in Europe, it would be impossible to prevent breaches. Lots of companies and ordinary people use VPNs, virtual private networks, which among other things disguise the true geographic origin of people accessing the internet. X.com would likely be held accountable for breaches which are beyond its power to prevent.
Perhaps the EU DSA law was designed to make compliance impossible? Musk’s blackmail accusation certainly raises this possibility. The EU cannot openly demand global content be censored, but by passing a law which is impossible to obey, then threatening enormous fines for non-compliance, they could put every social media or news provider into the position of a perpetrator who has to cut a deal with the authorities to save their skin.
If the USA had a president who cared about free speech, the USA could push back against this outrageous alleged attack on US freedom.
But President Biden appears to want censorship just as much as the EU, though thankfully Biden’s effort to inflict censorship on the American people was just as incompetent as most of his administration’s other policy initiatives. The US censorship push collapsed into ridicule, after Biden’s new disinformation commissioner turned out to be an amateur comedian.
I doubt there will be a similar happy ending for the EU censorship push.
In 2006 Farage made a memorable speech, in which Farage pointed out some members of the European Commission, the premier executive body of the European Union, had convictions for corruption, embezzlement or close ties to former Soviet tyrants.
This is the institution which is seeking to prosecute Musk for breaching their digital controls, which wants us to accept their moral and legal authority to control what we are allowed to read, see and hear. This is the institution which Musk claims attempted to blackmail him into secret censorship.
I believe we all owe Musk a vote of thanks for once again standing up to the forces of global censorship. The fact that none of Musk’s peers in the social media industry have stood by his side, in my opinion shows how close we are to losing some of our most precious freedoms.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
51 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scarecrow Repair
July 13, 2024 2:10 pm
I remember “Would you buy a used car from this man?” in relation to Dick Nixon. I also remember seeing graffiti, “Dick Nixon before he dicks you.”
I wonder if that question was around before Nixon, if Farage knows its history, and how many other people do.
Scissor
July 13, 2024 2:12 pm
Can’t say I like Scary Poppins.
Rud Istvan
July 13, 2024 2:31 pm
EU is well past its ‘best used by’ date. Not only with respect to X. Look at the farmers protests concerning dairy, beef, and nitrogen fertilizer. Look at the efforts to ‘get’ Apple’s store. Look at the failure to meet NATO commitments.
The EU Parliament has no legislative power, only the ability to rubber stamp EU regulations written by unelected bureaucrats.
Like limiting wattage on electric tea kettles. As if a given amount of water didn’t require a known amount of heat to boil. Lower wattage just means the kettle must stay on longer to boil. No energy savings at all from that regulation, self evident to anyone with a high school physics education.
When I first read about the structure of the EU and how the parliament was just a big rubber stamp for all practical purposes, it surprised the heck out of me. Then I realized it had been created and approved by governments, not people. I wonder if the EU subjects will ever wake up and take control.
“And people living in the EU have FULL control through their own democratically elected governments.”
You forgot the sarcasm tag. People living in the EU don’t even have control over their own governments. People pick from a range of parties, searching for the one that will screw them over the least.
Not even close to true. Only the European Parliament has members elected directly by the citizens of each country. It has no power except to approve or disapprove legislation proposed by the unelected, non-representative European Commission. The EC is also the executive branch of EU government, the one that enforces legislation it proposes. That’s about as close to elitist tyranny as you get without being an outright dictatorship.
Our electric kettle is not insulated. It has a lot of heat loss and cools quickly once the power turns off. If I do not use immediately, I will turn it on till it boils again before making tea.
So the longer it takes for the water to boil, the more heat will be lost.
The best energy conservation feature of modern electric kettles is a sight glass so you know the level and then only fill to the required level.
It makes economic sense to have kettles rated to the capacity of their outlet not limited to some arbitrary level.
For you tea lovers, only one sixth of the time in the the kettle brings the water to 100°C (212°F). It takes the other 5 sixths of the time to cause it to boil @100°C.😉
That step is the… Latent heat of evaporation / vaporization. “heat required to convert a unit mass of a liquid into vapour without a change in temperature”.
For Water, it = 2,256 kJ/kg; ( 970.4 Btu/lb )
Every type of tea has an optimum water temperature for brewing and a time range for steeping that allows for maximum flavour without bitterness.
Generally, young teas like white or green tea should be brewed with lower temperature water so that their delicate flavour compounds are not damaged. Teas that have been fermented, like black or oolong, can withstand more heat and the higher temperatures help extract the complex flavours.
Likewise, brewing times for each tea vary. Some teas will get bitter if left to steep too long while others can steep indefinitely.
Tea Brewing Temperatures & times
White Tea 65-70ºC 150-155ºF 1-2 min.
Green Tea 75-80ºC 165-175ºF 1-2 min.
Oolong Tea 80-85ºC 175-185ºF 2-3 min.
Black Tea 100ºC (boiling) 210ºF 2-3 min.
Herbal Tea 100ºC (boiling) 210ºF 3-6 min.
These teas should be added to boiling water & kept boiling/simmering for time
Top tea tip; in the mountains, use a small pressure cooker to boil your water
What exactly constitutes “misinformation” or “illegal content?” What criteria are used to assign such labels to certain content? Are we talking about content that questions the so-called “climate crisis?” Are we talking about content that questions the viability of wind turbines and solar panels as alternatives to fossil fuels? Inquiring minds want to know.
Many or most of the NATO countries in Europe are also in the EU, are they not? If Europe’s NATO members do not want Trump to pull the U.S. out of NATO, I would suggest they stop giving him reasons for doing so.
Theoretically speaking, ‘misinfo / disinfo’ could occur when an entity deliberately withholds vital information that’s critical for the public to consider when they try to make informed choices about major policy matters. On that angle, it could be said the U.S. partly public-funded PBS NewsHour news program puts out disinformation because it has flat out withheld the skeptic climate side of the issue for decades while giving unquestioned air time to scientists associated with the IPCC / NASA / NOAA who spew nothing but the CAGW side of the ‘science.’
Since when can Trump or any other president pull America out of NATO? It’s a treaty- so the president can’t do that. He might not cooperate with NATO, but pulling America out- is not his prerogative.
Sure, the French did it- but not just because its president wanted it- I’d have to assume it took more than that- their legislature or whatever had to agree. But the majority of Americans want NATO, in my opinion- they just want NATO nations to pay their share. The other day I saw the president of the Czech Republic say it was good that Trump has demanded that they pay more. He said that during the Cold War, the Europeans paid about as much as America into NATO, but now it’s more like 25%. That president has a long, distinguished, military career so he understands the situation.
HAHAHA, The best thing that can happen to us in Europe is to get out of NATO. Lets hope Trump dismantles it.
Of course reducing its influence gradually during his 4 years of mandate would be best an abrupt change will cause havoc, although I really think it would be net positive in the medium and long run.
Janice Moore
July 13, 2024 2:37 pm
Re: “close to losing our precious freedoms”
That depends on where you live.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
***
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; …
Constitution of the United States of America (Preamble and First Amendment)
Oh. I apparently misread the edict. I read it as only preventing E. U. member nations’ citizens from receiving uncensored information. I thought that the rest of the world could still see everything.
Any EU orders trying to control non-member states’ citizens are void and unenforceable, i.e., ultra vires.
Musk alleges they tried to blackmail him. If this claim is true we are not talking about due process, we are talking a illegal attempt at government compulsion.
Bob
July 13, 2024 2:52 pm
I wish Elon well. Government is inept and untrustworthy. The only thing worse than government is international government. There is no better example than the EU.
I always always tell people that the problem with government is not its bureaucracy, but its immortal coercive monopoly. The one saving grace of our current world is the very minimal competition between governments providing at least a modicum of foot voting. A world government would be the death of freedom and innovation.
A happy little debunker
July 13, 2024 2:56 pm
EU Charter of Fundamental Rights Article 11 – Freedom of expression and information
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.
Evidently, the EU is as willing to abide by that as the Democrats were willing to abide by Brown v Board of Education or NYSRPA v Bruen.
Tom Halla
July 13, 2024 3:25 pm
I think this is at least partly European, especially French, desire to harm American corporations. Biden et al are equally willing to coerce social media and other corporations, despite it being prima facie unconstitutional.
About the only realistic way to deal with this sort of censorship would be the US government threatening retribution on the EU, which the current regime would do shortly after shrimps learn to whistle.
Chris Hanley
July 13, 2024 4:30 pm
The surge in support for what they call “far-right” parties in the recent European elections has the EU ‘blobocracy’ worried.
Izaak Walton
July 13, 2024 4:55 pm
Is there any reason to believe Musk? He has a record of making false statements about his businesses such as claiming he had secure funding to take Tesla private. For which he was fined 20 million dollars and was forced to stand down from his position as chairman of Tesla.
Musk also has an extremely successful business record, which would have been impossible in the EU.
The EU hates individual freedom, and anything which promotes it. They have made it increasingly clear over the last several decades that they are jealous of American business successes. The massive billion dollar fines are just taxes.
The EU has a strong interest in censoring climate “misinformation”, so if Musk buckled to the alleged blackmail it would impact WUWT’s visibility. Facebook and other big players are still censoring narratives they think are disinformation.
For those not familiar, the 27-member European Commission is the branch of the EU government that has executive power AND is the only one that can propose legislation. It’s sort of like taking the U.S. Congress and joining it with the Executive branch—proposing laws and enforcing them, a recipe for unchecked (abuse of) power. Its members supposedly represent each member country but are sworn by oath to represent the interests of the EU government rather than their own country’s. They are not directly elected by each member country. On the other hand, the 720 members of the European Parliament that vote and decide if the legislation proposed by the EC goes into effect, are directly elected by the citizens of each country, but they can’t propose legislation. Because the EP can’t propose legislation, it’s not a true legislative body. That’s how government by elitists is created to trick citizens into thinking it represents their interests. It’s really just a modern version of the ancient European monarchy systems that prevailed until the 19th and 20th centuries, royalty and commoners.
Phillip Bratby
July 14, 2024 3:49 am
The EU is rife with corruption. It is anti-democratic, being run by unelected commissioners.
“We now have clear rules, ex ante obligations, strong oversight, speedy enforcement, and deterrent sanctions and we will make full use of our toolbox to protect our citizens and democracies.”
absurd! the “people” don’t want or need such protection
Tom_Morrow
July 14, 2024 7:32 am
I’ve called the EU the Fourth Reich for years, and everything it has done in the meantime only strengthens my view of them.
I remember “Would you buy a used car from this man?” in relation to Dick Nixon. I also remember seeing graffiti, “Dick Nixon before he dicks you.”
I wonder if that question was around before Nixon, if Farage knows its history, and how many other people do.
Can’t say I like Scary Poppins.
EU is well past its ‘best used by’ date. Not only with respect to X. Look at the farmers protests concerning dairy, beef, and nitrogen fertilizer. Look at the efforts to ‘get’ Apple’s store. Look at the failure to meet NATO commitments.
The EU Parliament has no legislative power, only the ability to rubber stamp EU regulations written by unelected bureaucrats.
Like limiting wattage on electric tea kettles. As if a given amount of water didn’t require a known amount of heat to boil. Lower wattage just means the kettle must stay on longer to boil. No energy savings at all from that regulation, self evident to anyone with a high school physics education.
When I first read about the structure of the EU and how the parliament was just a big rubber stamp for all practical purposes, it surprised the heck out of me. Then I realized it had been created and approved by governments, not people. I wonder if the EU subjects will ever wake up and take control.
There are no “EU subjects”. And people living in the EU have full control through their own democratically elected governments.
Do you want to buy a bridge, you a likely person to but one.
WRONG!
All the idiot greenie dictates come from the totally UN-ELECTED bureaucrats at the EU
CommisionCommunist branch.If EU governments don’t follow them, they get sanctioned.
There is no way you actually believe this.
“And people living in the EU have FULL control through their own democratically elected governments.”
You forgot the sarcasm tag. People living in the EU don’t even have control over their own governments. People pick from a range of parties, searching for the one that will screw them over the least.
Not even close to true. Only the European Parliament has members elected directly by the citizens of each country. It has no power except to approve or disapprove legislation proposed by the unelected, non-representative European Commission. The EC is also the executive branch of EU government, the one that enforces legislation it proposes. That’s about as close to elitist tyranny as you get without being an outright dictatorship.
Of course they are subjects- to some degree.
Download the building code for each member of the EU and compare each requirement with every other country. ALL ARE EQUAL other than language.
The EU even has regulations on the temperature a thermostat can be set at and when.
Our electric kettle is not insulated. It has a lot of heat loss and cools quickly once the power turns off. If I do not use immediately, I will turn it on till it boils again before making tea.
So the longer it takes for the water to boil, the more heat will be lost.
The best energy conservation feature of modern electric kettles is a sight glass so you know the level and then only fill to the required level.
It makes economic sense to have kettles rated to the capacity of their outlet not limited to some arbitrary level.
For you tea lovers, only one sixth of the time in the the kettle brings the water to 100°C (212°F). It takes the other 5 sixths of the time to cause it to boil @100°C.😉
That step is the… Latent heat of evaporation / vaporization.
“heat required to convert a unit mass of a liquid into vapour without a change in temperature”.
For Water, it = 2,256 kJ/kg; ( 970.4 Btu/lb )
Every type of tea has an optimum water temperature for brewing and a time range for steeping that allows for maximum flavour without bitterness.
Generally, young teas like white or green tea should be brewed with lower temperature water so that their delicate flavour compounds are not damaged. Teas that have been fermented, like black or oolong, can withstand more heat and the higher temperatures help extract the complex flavours.
Likewise, brewing times for each tea vary. Some teas will get bitter if left to steep too long while others can steep indefinitely.
Tea Brewing Temperatures & times
White Tea 65-70ºC 150-155ºF 1-2 min.
Green Tea 75-80ºC 165-175ºF 1-2 min.
Oolong Tea 80-85ºC 175-185ºF 2-3 min.
Top tea tip;
in the mountains, use a small pressure cooker to boil your water
Am I the only one who makes my tea in the microwave?
“No energy savings at all from that regulation”
it may take more- as the kettle slowly warms up, it’s losing heat
dissemination of illegal content
is the crux of the matter.
“Illegal content” can be ANYTHING.
I keep asking myself the same question here.
What exactly constitutes “misinformation” or “illegal content?” What criteria are used to assign such labels to certain content? Are we talking about content that questions the so-called “climate crisis?” Are we talking about content that questions the viability of wind turbines and solar panels as alternatives to fossil fuels? Inquiring minds want to know.
Many or most of the NATO countries in Europe are also in the EU, are they not? If Europe’s NATO members do not want Trump to pull the U.S. out of NATO, I would suggest they stop giving him reasons for doing so.
“misinformation”, “disinformation”, “illegal content”
= ‘anything we don’t want you know about’
Theoretically speaking, ‘misinfo / disinfo’ could occur when an entity deliberately withholds vital information that’s critical for the public to consider when they try to make informed choices about major policy matters. On that angle, it could be said the U.S. partly public-funded PBS NewsHour news program puts out disinformation because it has flat out withheld the skeptic climate side of the issue for decades while giving unquestioned air time to scientists associated with the IPCC / NASA / NOAA who spew nothing but the CAGW side of the ‘science.’
They will know it when they see it.
Since when can Trump or any other president pull America out of NATO? It’s a treaty- so the president can’t do that. He might not cooperate with NATO, but pulling America out- is not his prerogative.
He can virtually pull out while still being an official member. The President is commander-in-chief.
The French managed it, 1960s? 1970s? There’s probably a clause requiring a year’s notice.
And how would he rest of NATO prevent it? Declare war on the US?
On a more individual note, it would be like banning divorce; slavery.
Sure, the French did it- but not just because its president wanted it- I’d have to assume it took more than that- their legislature or whatever had to agree. But the majority of Americans want NATO, in my opinion- they just want NATO nations to pay their share. The other day I saw the president of the Czech Republic say it was good that Trump has demanded that they pay more. He said that during the Cold War, the Europeans paid about as much as America into NATO, but now it’s more like 25%. That president has a long, distinguished, military career so he understands the situation.
HAHAHA, The best thing that can happen to us in Europe is to get out of NATO. Lets hope Trump dismantles it.
Of course reducing its influence gradually during his 4 years of mandate would be best an abrupt change will cause havoc, although I really think it would be net positive in the medium and long run.
Re: “close to losing our precious freedoms”
That depends on where you live.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
***
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; …
Constitution of the United States of America (Preamble and First Amendment)
According to Musk everyone else took the deal and the EU is already censoring you.
Oh. I apparently misread the edict. I read it as only preventing E. U. member nations’ citizens from receiving uncensored information. I thought that the rest of the world could still see everything.
Any EU orders trying to control non-member states’ citizens are void and unenforceable, i.e., ultra vires.
Musk alleges they tried to blackmail him. If this claim is true we are not talking about due process, we are talking a illegal attempt at government compulsion.
I wish Elon well. Government is inept and untrustworthy. The only thing worse than government is international government. There is no better example than the EU.
I always always tell people that the problem with government is not its bureaucracy, but its immortal coercive monopoly. The one saving grace of our current world is the very minimal competition between governments providing at least a modicum of foot voting. A world government would be the death of freedom and innovation.
EU Charter of Fundamental Rights
Article 11 – Freedom of expression and information
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.
Evidently, the EU is as willing to abide by that as the Democrats were willing to abide by Brown v Board of Education or NYSRPA v Bruen.
I think this is at least partly European, especially French, desire to harm American corporations. Biden et al are equally willing to coerce social media and other corporations, despite it being prima facie unconstitutional.
About the only realistic way to deal with this sort of censorship would be the US government threatening retribution on the EU, which the current regime would do shortly after shrimps learn to whistle.
The surge in support for what they call “far-right” parties in the recent European elections has the EU ‘blobocracy’ worried.
Is there any reason to believe Musk? He has a record of making false statements about his businesses such as claiming he had secure funding to take Tesla private. For which he was fined 20 million dollars and was forced to stand down from his position as chairman of Tesla.
Obviously it is Musk’s word against the EU at this point. But given the “quality” of the EU executive I’m inclined to believe Musk on this issue.
Musk also has an extremely successful business record, which would have been impossible in the EU.
The EU hates individual freedom, and anything which promotes it. They have made it increasingly clear over the last several decades that they are jealous of American business successes. The massive billion dollar fines are just taxes.
Anyone with even an ounce of working brain capacity would take Elon’s word over the corrupt un-elected parasites of the EU
CommisionCommunist branch.There is no reason to believe you about anything. Quibbling moron.
There is more reason to believe him than believe you.
Dark patterns? Could the EU be more transparent?
I assume the climate connection is that the climate between Musk and the EU is cooling. Or is it just weather?
The EU has a strong interest in censoring climate “misinformation”, so if Musk buckled to the alleged blackmail it would impact WUWT’s visibility. Facebook and other big players are still censoring narratives they think are disinformation.
For those not familiar, the 27-member European Commission is the branch of the EU government that has executive power AND is the only one that can propose legislation. It’s sort of like taking the U.S. Congress and joining it with the Executive branch—proposing laws and enforcing them, a recipe for unchecked (abuse of) power. Its members supposedly represent each member country but are sworn by oath to represent the interests of the EU government rather than their own country’s. They are not directly elected by each member country. On the other hand, the 720 members of the European Parliament that vote and decide if the legislation proposed by the EC goes into effect, are directly elected by the citizens of each country, but they can’t propose legislation. Because the EP can’t propose legislation, it’s not a true legislative body. That’s how government by elitists is created to trick citizens into thinking it represents their interests. It’s really just a modern version of the ancient European monarchy systems that prevailed until the 19th and 20th centuries, royalty and commoners.
The EU is rife with corruption. It is anti-democratic, being run by unelected commissioners.
“We now have clear rules, ex ante obligations, strong oversight, speedy enforcement, and deterrent sanctions and we will make full use of our toolbox to protect our citizens and democracies.”
absurd! the “people” don’t want or need such protection
I’ve called the EU the Fourth Reich for years, and everything it has done in the meantime only strengthens my view of them.