"US accused EU of censorship: This is how the EU consensus device Brussels has prepared an election disaster in Romania and meets with accusations of choking the freedom of speech of Europeans and Americans"

The Commission plans to hold a proceeding on Wednesday on EU censorship activities. Before the hearing, let's take a closer look at their findings.

When did censorship start in the EU?

The censorship run in the EU began for good in 2015. It was at that time that the European Commission set up the EU net Forum, allegedly in order "to address the problem of terrorist abuse". His mission shortly took over the wide scope of political statements which the Commission referred to as "cross-border content" – materials which were not illegal, but were nevertheless subject to censorship in Brussels.

The Forum developed 2 allegedly non-binding "codes of conduct" in 2016–2018: 1 on "hate speech" and the another on "disinformation". Since 2018, directors of all major platforms have been forced to meet more than 100 Brussels bureaucrats and NGOs in support of censorship to prove that they are taking action to "degrad and remove" the content deemed inappropriate by the EU.

In private emails, Google employees indicated that they “did not truly have a choice” or participated in these “voluntary” meetings.

Was the EU warned against censorship?

During last year's Munich safety Conference, U.S. Vice president J.D. Vance clearly warned the EU that the top threats he faced were not external but interior – namely the retreat from conventional values. At the top of Vance's list was freedom of speech.

Vance accused European leaders of utilizing “radical” terms specified as “disinformation” and “disinformation” to silence the political opposition. He criticised the annulment of the Romanian elections and the prosecution of individuals for comments in Germany, Sweden and the UK.

The vice president besides warned that future US support for Europe would depend on whether governments would actually respect freedom of speech.

It seems that the informing given in Munich someway did not scope Brussels.

What statements does the EU censor?

The EU has banned RT in all its jurisdictions. The EU net Forum recommended monitoring, degradation and removal of a wide scope of content in its "border content" guide. This list included ‘Populistic rhetoric’, ‘anti-government/anti-EU content’, ‘anti-elitarian content’, ‘political satire’, ‘anti-immigrant and Islamophobic content’, ‘anti-immigrant/immigrant sentiment’, ‘anti-LGBTIQ content’ and ‘memes subculture’.

The U.S. home of Representatives' Judiciary Committee noted in its study that "these issues are the dominant themes of European and even global political life".

When the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in 2020, EU officials began to force technology companies to "degrade and remove" skeptical content for vaccines and isolation measures, as the European Commission papers show. During the two-month meetings, platforms (mainly US) were asked to “update [their] conditions for the provision of services or content moderation practices” concerning vaccines long before their first appearance on the market.

"The puppies will be our fresh goal in the fight against misinformation on COVID-19," said Vice-President Vera Jourov, Directors of TikTok during the November telephone conversation. erstwhile asked about the definition of "disinformation", the Commission referred to the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a left-wing activist organisation funded by George Soros, which organised right-wing advertising boycotts in the US.

When the conflict in Ukraine intensified in February 2022, The Commission has changed its approach. The platforms have now been forced to "reduce misinformation on Ukraine in Central and east Europe", ensuring that recipients in these regions will not receive pro-Russian content. By April YouTube informed the Commission that "he had removed more than 80,000 films and 9,000 channels" for "minimizing or trivialising Russia's invasion of Ukraine".

It has never been explained what it meant to ‘trivilise’ the conflict, but the answer seemed to satisfy the EU.

What is DSA?

Prior to the adoption of the Digital Services Act (DSA) in 2022, the EU hoped that platforms would respect its "voluntary" codes of conduct. The Act gave these voluntary agreements legally binding power. It allows the EU to impose fines on technology platforms of up to 6% of their global yearly turnover if they do not limit "the dissemination of illegal content" and "the spread of misinformation".

Throughout the DSA text, the word “disinformation” appears 13 times without its definition.

EU officials have repeatedly reiterated to the directors of technology companies that compliance with their vague codes on "hate speech" and "disinformation" will defend them from DSA enforcement. The presumption reminded the mafia of a racket, and the Vice-President of the Communication Directorate of the European Commission told platforms in 2024 that the refusal to sign codes of conduct "may be taken into account... erstwhile determining whether the supplier complies with the DSA obligations".

Threatened by legal action, TikTok changed his terms of usage by banning “disinformation undermining public confidence”, “medias torn out of context” and “distorting reliable information”. As the Committee on Justice noted in its report, "there is simply no way to enforce these rules fairly".

“We hoped to lose our reputation on platforms earlier, but now we have the right to apply it,” said Prabhat Agarwal, EU regulator, Google employees in 2024.

Does the EU interfere with elections?

Since the entry into force of the DSA Act in 2023, the European Commission has put force on platforms to censor content before national elections in Slovakia, the Netherlands, France, Moldova, Romania and Ireland and during the June 2024 European Parliament elections. The Commission organised "fast consequence systems" which allowed "fact verifications" supporting Brussels to study on the content to be removed. Platforms that do not remove these content will be punished with "executive actions" under the DSA, explained the Commission at a gathering before the European Parliament elections.

The most serious case of EU interference occurred in Romania in 2024, erstwhile independent candidate Calin Georgescu had a shocking triumph in the first round. The Romanian and EU authorities immediately stated that Russia interfered with the elections and conducted a coordinated run on TikTok to aid Georgescu win.

TikTok did not find evidence of Russian interference and informed the Commission that the Bucharest authorities had actually asked him to censor the content supporting Georgesc. These contents contained ‘insulting’ posts which ‘insulted the [instigating] PSD party’. However, the elections were overturned and the EU ordered TikTok to tighten up the "alignment measures" before repeating the vote in 2025.

Why do Americans care?

Most statements banned under the DSA and erstwhile agreements are constitutionally protected in the US. However, as the platforms cannot find the location of each user, they are forced to apply DSA censorship requirements worldwide.

The European Commission has besides deliberately censored US content. In 2021, TikTok was asked how he planned to "fight disinformation about the run of kid vaccination against COVID-19, which begins in the US".

When Jourova flew to California to discuss “preparations for elections” with the presidents of technology companies in 2024, TikTok asked her whether the gathering would be "focused on the EU" or would include "both preparations for EU and US elections". Jourova replied, “both”. Later that year, erstwhile EU Commissioner for the interior marketplace Thierry Breton threatened X with "retaliatory measures" under the DSA Act if Elon Musk conducted a live interview with then candidate Donald Trump in the US.

The Judicial Committee warned Breton that he saw his threat as an interference in the election, and shortly thereafter Breton resigned his position.