The European Commission claims that X (formerly Twitter) is โin breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA)โ โ and therefore the platform is at risk of millions of euros in fines and other retaliatory measures.
However, owner Elon Musk and other commentators argue that the powers that be are out to punish X because, unlike many other social media platforms, it has refused to secretly impose extensive censorship on the platform.
The Commissionโs โpreliminary viewโ is that X is in breach of the DSA because, among other things, the blue checkmarks indicating who has a verified account โdoes not correspond to industry practice and deceives usersโ.
โSince anyone can subscribe to obtain such a โverifiedโ status, it negatively affects usersโ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact withโ, it claims.
The Brussels powers-that-be also claim that X โdoes not comply with the required transparency on advertising, as it does not provide a searchable and reliable advertisement repositoryโ, and are also appalled that X โfails to provide access to its public data to researchersโ.
โIn particular, X prohibits eligible researchers from independently accessing its public data, such as by scraping, as stated in its terms of service. In addition, Xโs process to grant eligible researchers access to its application programming interface (API) appears to dissuade researchers from carrying out their research projects or leave them with no other choice than to pay disproportionally high feesโ, it continues.
A retaliatory measure?
โIf the Commissionโs preliminary views are ultimately confirmed, the Commission would adopt a non-compliance decision finding that X is in breach of Articles 25, 39 and 40(12) of the Digital Services Directive. Such a decision could impose fines of up to 6% of the service providerโs total annual worldwide turnover and require the service provider to take measures to remedy the infringementโ, it threatens, promising to โforceโ X to comply in such a scenario.
X owner Elon Musk, however, believes that this is an act of pure vengeance by the powers that be in Brussels, and says that the European Commission recently โoffered X an illegal secret dealโ to avoid heavy fines โ in exchange for introducing extensive censorship.
โThe other platforms took the deal. X did notโ, he continues.
The European Commission offered ๐ an illegal secret deal: if we quietly censored speech without telling anyone, they would not fine us.
The other platforms accepted that deal.
๐ did not. https://t.co/4lKsaRsYoA
โ Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 12, 2024
โDonโt be fooledโ
Investigative journalist and author Michael Shellenberger agrees, saying that โthe totalitarianism we warned about is now happeningโ.
โThe European Union is at this moment forcing big tech companies to secretly engage in mass censorship. Google and Facebook are, apparently, going along with it. Only Elon Muskโs X, among the major platforms, is resistingโ, he writes.
โthe EU is preparing to punish X with massive fines โ up to 6% of total global revenue. I canโt imagine a more egregious form of foreign interference in our domestic affairs than foreign governments demanding mass secret censorship for ideological and political purposesโ, he continues.
Shellenberger says that the โmost terrifyingโ thing is how government intelligence and security services appear to be directly involved in demanding censorship โ while those same governments warn daily of Russian censorship.
โDonโt be fooled by what is happening. Governments and former intelligence officials in Europe, Australia, Israel, Brazil, and Ukraine and other nations are not only demanding censorship but also often spreading their own disinformationโ, he explains.
The totalitarianism we warned of is happening.
The European Union is at this moment forcing big tech companies to secretly engage in mass censorship. Google and Facebook are, apparently, going along with it.
Only Elon Muskโs X, among the major platforms, is resisting.
A fewโฆ pic.twitter.com/CO1TFJqXfz
โ Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) July 12, 2024
โWe have to fight backโ
He argues that the EUโs claims that there is more false information on X than on other, more heavily censored platforms are simply false. Rather, X has greater and broader freedom of expression, where discussion and dialogue are used โto give context to controversial contentโ โ rather than bans and blocks.
โWhat the EU wants is for its committees of experts, not Community Notes, to secretly decide what we can read and say online. This is unethical and unconstitutional. Another key part of the EUโs disinformation is that โresearchersโ should have access to Xโs internal data, which Musk cut off when he bought Twitter. But those people who want the data arenโt researchers. Theyโre censorship activists, many of whom have deep relationships with governments in general and intelligence agencies in particularโ, he continues.
Schellenberger warns that if the EU succeeds in censoring X and the other major Internet platforms, there will be no freedom of expression โ only government-controlled speech.
โMany people rightly worry about the implications of a single man, Elon Musk, being all that stands between us and foreign governmentsโ totalitarian censorship plans. I worry about that, too. Our speech is inalienable. It is not something governments give to usโ.
โWe need to fight back. While we should be grateful to Musk for standing up to the totalitarians in Europe, Brazil, and Australia, we must build a citizenโs movement to fight backโ, the journalist urges.
We look forward to a very public battle in court, so that the people of Europe can know the truth https://t.co/nKBGEPxeEa
โ Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 12, 2024
TikTok can also be punished
It should also be noted that X is not the only platform that EU leaders want to punish and โbring into lineโ. Chinaโs TikTok has long been accused of being a platform for spreading โdisinformationโ and โhateโ and is being investigated to see if it too is in violation of the DSA โ if so, it too risks being fined 6% of its global revenue.
In the past, governments in the US and EU have mainly relied on the major platforms to censor controversial and politically incorrect content โ such as criticism of mass immigration, feminism, or the LGBTQ movement โ on their own initiative, which has happened on a large scale on YouTube and Facebook, among others.
Recently, however, there seems to have been a partial shift in focus, with platforms being more explicitly forced to implement various forms of censorship โ and threatened with penalties and fines if they refuse.
