The Dawning Of Blatant Totalitarianism: EU’s Digital Services Act no longer conceals Brussels’ mission to kill free speech worldwide

EU’s Digital Services Act no longer conceals Brussels’ mission to kill free speech worldwide

Rhoda Wilson

Recently, the European Union implemented a totalitarian new regulation known as the “Digital Services Act.” It was enforced last Friday. This legislation ushers in an exceedingly rigorous regime of online content control, surpassing any previous forms of authoritarian oversight.  While this law is specific to Europe, its ramifications are poised to exert a substantial influence on a global scale.

The Dawning of Blatant EU Totalitarianism

By A Lily Bit

A significant shift has occurred in the realm of the Internet, yet the majority of individuals residing in the United States may not be fully aware of its implications. Recently, the European Union implemented a totalitarian new regulation known as the “Digital Services Act,” and its enforcement commenced last Friday. This legislation ushers in an exceedingly rigorous regime of online content control, surpassing any previous forms of authoritarian oversight.

Under this new regulation, legions of European officials will act as the arbiters of what qualifies as acceptable discourse on the Internet. If they come across content on a major online platform that they deem objectionable, they possess the authority to compel the platform to remove it, all because someone in Europe might encounter it. While this law is specific to Europe, its ramifications are poised to exert a substantial influence on a global scale.

A seismic shift is underway, signalling a transformative moment in the digital landscape. Reports are surfacing that the Digital Services Act (“DSA”) has ushered in a profound change, one where major technology corporations are held legally responsible for the content that populates their platforms.

This paradigm-altering development essentially means that these tech giants, previously operating with a degree of immunity from content accountability, are now bound by the law to monitor and regulate the material posted on their platforms. The DSA imposes a legal obligation upon them to ensure that the content aligns with stringent standards and does not violate established guidelines.

In essence, the DSA marks a watershed moment, as it not only underscores the growing importance of digital responsibility but also demands a significant recalibration of how these technology giants’ function in the online sphere. Consequently, the implications of this legal shift are poised to reverberate throughout the digital world, shaping the future of online content and user interactions.

The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) has officially gone into effect. Starting on August 25th, 2023, tech giants like Google, Facebook, Amazon, and more must comply with sweeping legislation that holds online platforms legally accountable for the content posted to them.

Even though this new law was passed in the EU, we’ll likely see far-reaching global effects as companies adjust their policies to comply.

So, what types of speech does the DSA aim to regulate? The Strengthened Code of Practice on Disinformation from the previous year defines disinformation as “false or misleading content that is disseminated with the intent to deceive or gain economic or political advantages and that may lead to public harm.” This code has already been applied during elections and in response to crises such as covid and the conflict in Ukraine.

These measures are often presented as innocuous and non-political, merely steering users away from unfounded claims like 5G towers causing covid or countering deliberate foreign interference. However, the reality is more complex. To illustrate this point, consider the European Digital Media Observatory (“EDMO”), an EU-funded fact-checking hub whose goal is to “detect disinformation, uncover its sources, or mitigate its impact.”

This organisation, which claims to be “independent” and “impartial,” can be seen as the EU’s equivalent of a surveillance entity. Launched by the Commission in June 2020 with a budget of €13.5 million, it compiles reports on online discourse within the EU. These reports include regular “fact-checking briefs,” “disinformation reports” for specific countries and “early warnings” regarding anticipated disinformation trends – all aimed at “pre-bunking” falsehoods. “Pre-bunking,” as one EDMO presentation explains, is the process of exposing falsehoods before they gain traction.

The output from EDMO exemplifies how the notion of “disinformation” is cynically wielded by bureaucratic entities. Consider their 2023 briefing on disinformation in Ireland. EDMO informs us that it routinely monitors 12 online platforms within this EU member state, encompassing mainstream platforms like Twitter, WhatsApp, and YouTube, as well as their less regulated counterparts such as Gettr, Telegram, and Odysee. In this briefing, they enumerate various “disinformation trends” observed in Ireland, which are purportedly causing “harm.” These trends encompass:

This revealing document underscores how the technocratic campaign against so-called “disinformation” is fundamentally political and undemocratic. What’s labelled as “disinformation” is, in reality, any political narrative that runs counter to the preferences of the globalist EU establishment – even the term “globalists” itself is stigmatised as unacceptable.

The actual veracity of content deemed “false or misleading” by European bureaucrats becomes irrelevant in this context. What holds significance is that online platforms must comply with the directives they receive, or they will face severe consequences.

Online platforms that don’t comply with the DSA’s rules could see fines of up to 6 per cent of their global turnover. According to the EU Commission, the Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission will have the power to ‘require immediate actions where necessary to address very serious harms.’ A platform continually refusing to comply could result in a temporary suspension in the EU.

Under this Orwellian framework, an assembly of hundreds of unelected EU bureaucrats will determine what qualifies as disinformation and instruct major technology companies to enforce censorship. Faced with potential damage to their reputation and financial penalties, these companies will have little choice but to comply. This censorship can take various forms: human moderators removing content, shadow-banning problematic content creators to limit their reach, demonetising specific content, and adjusting algorithms to promote or demote certain subjects. While the DSA technically applies only within the EU’s legal boundaries, once integrated within major tech firms, this extensive content-regulation apparatus is likely to impact users worldwide.

More....