The US government agency says the bloc’s online content-moderation policies violate free speech
The EU’s online content regulations are an affront to free speech, the US State Department has said in response to France’s praise for the Digital Services Act (DSA).
The State Department echoed earlier criticism from US Vice President J.D. Vance, who accused EU member states of attempting to quash dissenting voices and stigmatize popular right-wing parties such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD).
“In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won’t fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom,” the State Department wrote on X on Tuesday. “All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.”
Earlier this month, France’s mission to the UN promoted the DSA on X, stating, “In Europe, one is free to speak, not free to spread illegal content.”
Passed in 2022, the DSA mandates that online platforms remove “illegal and harmful” content and combat “the spread of disinformation,” according to the European Commission. Critics in both the US and Europe have likened the regulations to the creation of a ‘ministry of truth’.
Earlier this year, prosecutors in Paris launched an investigation into Elon Musk’s platform X, on suspicion that it was being used to meddle in French politics and spread hateful messages. The company dismissed the probe as “politically motivated.”
In 2024, the French authorities detained Russian-born tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov on charges that he had allowed his Telegram messaging app to be used for criminal activities.
Durov, who was later released on bail, denied any wrongdoing and accused France of waging “a crusade” against free speech. He also claimed that French intelligence officials attempted to pressure him into censoring content during Romania’s 2024 presidential election.
France’s foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE, confirmed that it had “reminded” Durov of his responsibility to police content, but denied allegations of election interference.
Read the full article here