The EU’s “Democracy Shield,” is presented as a way to strengthen information integrity online, especially in the context of elections – but which opponents believe is another way for the bloc’s bureaucracy to tighten the screws on tech giants, speech-wise – is facing vocal opposition in the European Parliament (EP).
The initiative’s first monthly meeting heard criticism in particular from MEPs that come from conservative and sovereignty parties, who wanted to know what exactly qualifies as “foreign interference in elections” – and why the double standard in the way social media content is treated compared to legacy, corporate media.
Namely, while the latter, in Europe at least almost without exception aligned with those in power, is free to publish any opinion, including those that are biased and could be reasonably expected to impact the outcome of an election, social media accounts get banned, while platforms are forced to change algorithms to limit the reach of any content branded as “foreign interference.”
To this point, some MEPs asked if only Russia is to be considered as a possible “election meddler” – or if other countries, the US included, can play the same role in some scenarios – and, that could be true of the EU itself.
According to European Conservative, MEP Fidias Panayiotou gave an example: “In my country, Cyprus, in 2004, through USAID, the US spent $60 million on the referendum for reunification.” […]
— Read More: reclaimthenet.org
- Gold SKYROCKETED during Trump’s first term and is poised to do it again. Find out how Genesis Precious Metals can help you secure your retirement with a proper self-directed IRA backed by physical precious metals.