Renee Parsons
On the eve of the Elon Musk – Donald Trump conversation which aired over X on August 13th, an obscure EU Commissioner wrote to X Chair/Owner Musk in a presumptuous, if brazen, letter asserting that the UK’s Constitutionally flawed Digital Services Act required US compliance. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Written on behalf of the European Commission, EU Commissioner Thierry Breton’s letter aroused considerable public attention as it stirred more interest in the upcoming conversation between America’s two high profile icons.
Breton was part of the von der Leyden Commission which prepared the DSA based on Ursula von der Leyden’s draft proposal during her campaign for EU President in 2019. In its adoption of the DSA, the EU which does not recognize America’s First Amendment or its intent, assumes an international mandate over all digital communication as it declares itself the lone arbiter of what constitutes all that is fit to print.
Breton’s letter asserted that the legally defective “DSA obligations apply without exceptions or discrimination to the moderation of the whole user community and content of X (including yourself as a user with over 190 million followers)” while citing X’s responsibility to submit to the “risk of amplification of potential harmful content around the world.”
Breton went on to remind Musk “I am compelled to remind you of the due diligence obligations in the Digital Services Act (DSA)” although as a US citizen and X as a US company, neither are under any obligation to comply with the DSA.
At the same time, Breton’s letter tested the historic borders of a foreign country daring to insinuate itself directly into American politics, not unlike how Israel has assumed ownership of the entire US Congress. The EU’s adoption of the DSA has lost sight of the fact that Great Britain’s ability to influence American policy ended when General Cornwallis surrendered to George Washington at Yorktown in 1781.
***
What received little media attention the next day was that Breton’s letter received no green light from EU President Ursula von der Leyden and that Breton took it upon himself to initiate the letter to Musk who had already by targeted by the DSA.
After creating considerable turmoil on both sides of the pond, Breton was not authorized to issue any warning to Musk citing ‘harmful content’ by broadcasting the conversation with former President Trump as it demanded X compliance with the DSA.
What Breton called X’s ‘due diligence obligations’ requires platforms like X to ‘moderate illegal content’ that is deemed a “risk to public safety.” Breton’s letter, nor does the DSA, define what constitutes ‘illegal’ content.
Known as UK’s top digital enforcer, Breton was immediately faulted by the EU of ‘going rogue’ as it offered that Breton’s “timing and the wording of the letter were neither coordinated or agreed with the president nor with the [commissioners].”
***
With a false sense of influence since no EU Members are elected to public office, Breton’s letter constituted interference in American politics as House Judiciary Committee Chair, Rep. Jim Jordan informed the Commissioner that the Committee “condemned the European Union’s actions, threatening to investigate their attempts to infringe on free speech.”
Jordan went on to “demand that you stop any attempt to intimidate individuals or entities engaged in political speech in the United States” and that the Committee is conducting oversight on whether the US State Department has colluded to censor lawful speech as it subpoenaed the Department to respond to the Biden Administration’s silence.
Background for Breton’s over-reaction has blamed social media in the UK for false information while fueling far-right sentiment within the EU that precipitated the spread of recent riots in the UK.
While the DSA is little more than a blatant censorship campaign, the EU’s attempt is to rein in big tech firms as it enforces European values regarding free expression, corporate responsibility and fostering a pluralistic society.
Referred to as the “new constitution for the internet” suggests a rulebook for platforms to handle material that has been deemed illegal, yet fails to define what the DSA calls illegal or harmful content as well as dis or misinformation. The DSA requires independent audits to assure compliance as the EU hires 200 employees to enforce the law.
As the war in Ukraine began in 2022, European policymakers felt a sense of urgency to move the legislation forward to ensure that major tech platforms protected against the spread of ‘illegal’ content, were transparent and properly regulated; thereby attempting to block the Russians from informing the public about the conduct of the war.
Across the pond, the US cabal is laboring to destroy America’s Constitutional Republic via multiple effort; not the least of which is the struggle to neuter the First Amendment.
It is expected that some US big tech firms may already be in compliance with the DSA in removing ‘extremist’ content even without being confronted given its need to conform while sanctity of the First Amendment still blocks a wholesale auction on free speech.
As a harbinger of what is to come within the US, the EU took the liberty of setting up an office in Silicon Valley in order to liaison on the DSA despite its clear danger to free internet speech even as the Europeans had earlier insisted they would never support censorship of content.
On this side of the pond, there is a new era aborning as establishment elite media like the NY Times dramatic 2019 op ed entitled “Free Speech is Killing US” accusing even the First Amendment of ‘eroding our democracy” which claims ‘disinformation’ or hate speech a result of unmonitored free speech.
The Washington Post, no longer the heyday of independent journalism, suggested that “The US could Learn from EU’s Speech Rules” which also dismissed the First Amendment. In a recent article in a liberal political news publication which reviewed the EU’s charges against X, Politico never once mentioned the First Amendment.
In 2022, Musk bought what was then called Twitter, renamed it to X and promised to open dialogue in the name of free speech which has, to a large extent, been successful as it presented otherwise previous limited articles to a wider audience.
The current Breton letter is not the DSA’s first foray in the US as X was targeted by the EU in 2023. The EU opened official proceedings based on suspected infringement of ‘breaching its obligations on transparency’ and failure to respect the Digital Services Act. X has been formally charged X with a possible multi million euro fine as the DSA will investigate X’s systems and policies including the possible spread of terrorist and violent content linked to the October 7th Hamas attack in Israel.
***
A very loose array of penalties and compliance requirements spells out a complex DSA Enforcement process of comprehensive investigative, imposition of non-compliance penalties and sanction powers that enables any national authority or the European Commission to implement non compliance or infringement charges without identifying any specific legal framework
In a confusing array of penalties, fines fluctuate up to 6% of global turnover or periodic penalties of up to 5% of average daily worldwide turnover or fines of up to 1% worldwide annual turnover, some of which may be appealed before EU courts.
***
As the unraveling of civil society in the UK was exacerbated by race riots, claiming social media misinformation and “illegal” content were cited as causes for an acceleration of violence between its native born citizens at 75% of the population (down from 88% in 2001) and its 2.5 million immigrants population, more than 80% from non-European countries.
UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmar defined the source of violence as ‘far right thuggery’ in contrast to what Nigel Farage referred to a ‘mass, uncontrolled immigration.”
Americans watch in alarmed anticipation as the US braces for its own impending civil unrest. There is an element of suspense as social media may be blamed for reporting false narratives and anti-immigrant sentiment on violence related to illegals who have crossed the southern border, as they merge into the American population and may surface as foreign agents of wanton violence.
In 2023, the European Commission identified nineteen on line platforms with more than 45 million active users that would be required to comply with its restrictions including the largest and most influential US sites: Apple, Amazon, Bing, Facebook, Google, Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube and its favorite current target X (formerly Twitter).
***
As civil unrest continues, it becomes obvious that claims of disinformation, hate speech and ‘illegal’ verbiage becomes a convenient measure to test every digital platform to determine whether they will respond in compliance with the EU or whether other platforms besides X will be accosted.
The real lesson in Breton’s letter to Musk is that social media platforms that do not conform to the DSA, like X, can expect to experience continued institutional harassment and on going provocation until they achieve satisfactory conformance to all of its requirements.
What largely escapes public notice is the DSA’s dual purpose since it has the ability to ultimately diminish the level of advertising revenue necessary for continued functions, to sufficiently disrupt operation and production creating an unsustainable level of fiscal instability as the platform weakens and loses its contributors and accounts and ability to represent the public’s interest in free speech.