EU Imposes Compulsory 'Disinformation' Clampdown Under Digital Services Act, Introducing Worldwide Censorship Authoritarianism
The European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) has been implemented, instating mandatory censorship mechanisms that primarily target tech giants. This new legislation, which comes into full effect from July 1, 2025, aims to combat disinformation and regulate Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs).
The DSA's key measures include the mandatory enforcement of the "Code of Practice on Disinformation," which was previously voluntary. Under the DSA, platforms will be legally bound to demonstrate compliance through transparency, audits, and active measures to combat disinformation. Failure to comply could result in regulatory penalties, effectively compelling platforms to censor or demote content flagged as "disinformation" according to EU standards.
The DSA also imposes strict fines, with penalties reaching up to 6% of a company's global annual turnover for non-compliance. This incentivises platforms to preemptively censor lawful but potentially controversial content to avoid costly penalties, thereby aligning content moderation with the EU's political and cultural definitions of harmful or disallowed speech.
Transparency and accountability requirements under the DSA also put pressure on tech companies to self-censor more rigorously. Platforms must be transparent about their moderation policies and share details on content removals, including those related to copyright and disinformation.
The DSA's broad powers have raised concerns about its impact on free speech and cross-border digital rights. Critics argue that the DSA is not about protecting citizens but silencing them, as its vague definitions of "harmful content" and "disinformation" could potentially allow governments to suppress dissent under the pretext of public safety.
The DSA's expansion in mid-February will encompass more platforms, regardless of size. This could potentially suppress independent media and creators, further widening the scope of censorship. The DSA's focus on "foreign information manipulation" (FIMI) mirrors past tactics, potentially justifying domestic repression.
The EU's censorship apparatus is also raising concerns beyond Europe. Because many major tech companies operate globally, the DSA's requirements push US-based and other non-EU platforms to adopt EU-style censorship approaches worldwide to avoid regulatory and financial repercussions. This has led to criticism from American politicians and tech leaders who see this as undermining free speech and digital sovereignty.
The DSA's passage without significant public debate is another concern for transparency and democratic accountability. The law's rapid implementation has fueled speculation that it may merely codify backroom deals into binding policy, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukraine crisis where tech companies complied with the DSA's requirements.
In summary, the DSA enforces mandatory censorship mechanisms on large tech companies by legally binding them to combat disinformation, imposing strict transparency and audit obligations, and incentivizing preemptive removal or demotion of content to avoid significant fines. This regulatory regime reshapes online speech standards within the EU and globally, raising serious concerns about impacts on free speech and cross-border digital rights.
- In an effort to combat disinformation, the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) has expanded to enforce censorship on tech companies, potentially leading to the suppression of alternative media and free speech.
- The broad powers of the DSA, with vague definitions of harmful content and disinformation, could potentially be used to silence dissent under the guise of public safety, impacting truth and the exercise of free speech.
- The DSA's focus on technology, particularly Very Large Online Platforms and Very Large Online Search Engines, is raising concerns globally, as it encourages US-based and other non-EU platforms to adopt EU-style censorship approaches to avoid regulatory and financial penalties, potentially undermining digital sovereignty and free speech.
