EU Commissioner Theirry Breton has been accused of attempting to censor freedom of speech in the United States after last month sending a series of “threats” to X owner Elon Musk.
The Brussels Signal reported on letters exchanged between Thierry Breton and Chairman of the powerful US House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan.
As Gript previously reported, the letter of warning from the EU Commissioner came in the lead up to Musk’s plans to host a livestream interview with the US presidential candidate Donal Trump on X.
Now Jordan, has accused Breton and the EU of trying to “censor” freedom of speech in the US, saying that the letter to Musk was motivated by a desire to censor “political speech with which you disagreed,”
Breton has denied any political motivation behind his letter to Musk saying that the EU does not take an interest in political partisanism, but was concerned only with the regulation of illegal content being propagated in the EU contrary to the terms of the Digital Service Act (DSA).
Breton argued that Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) such as X have an increased responsibility to be answerable for allegations of hosting illegal content saying “the responsibilities of online platforms increase along with the platform’s reach and societal impact,” where X has some 45 million users in the EU, or approximately 10% of the population.
However, Jordan retorted that Breton’s assertions that he “would never interfere in the American democratic process” were “contradicted” by his “actions”.
The Chairman of the House of Judiciary Committee insisted the claim that the EU Commissioner “decided to write to Mr. Musk [] to ensure that X’s trust and safety systems function properly to cope with a likely spike of online activity which could amplify dissemination in the EU of posts by users potentially containing illegal content, disinformation, or posts which run counter to the terms and conditions of the platform,” was unconvincing saying that he had not sent such a public and “unsolicited letter” to anyone else.
Breton argued that his letter to Musk “did not raise any issues with the live broadcasting of the interview itself” and that the EU Commission “ take no view on the context of the interview and the political views of the protagonists of that interview are of no relevance in our decision to send that letter.”
Not accepting this as a credible explanation, Jordan insisted that, “The only logical inference from your actions is that your letter was intended as a threat to Musk that the EU would, as you warned, “make full use of [its] toolbox” if he facilitated political speech with which you disagreed.” said Jordan.
Jordan argued that Musk was an American citizen and that X was an American company, noting how the EU can fine companies as much as 6% of their global revenue for failing to abide by the terms of the DSA, saying that for large US companies this could be “billions of dollars”.
In relation to issues surrounding who decides what is “disinformation”, Jordan said Breton, the European Commission, and the DSA seemed to “ to miss a fundamental point about free speech—to oppose censorship of so-called “disinformation” is not to defend or to endorse the content.” he said.
Jordan said that the position of censorship it was rather to, “respect the right and the ability of citizens to consume content and to make decisions about what speech is persuasive, what is truthful, and what is accurate.”
He continued that to “oppose censorship is to acknowledge that a government with the authority to define disinformation will inevitably do so in a way that benefits those in power at the expense of the truth.”‘
Jordan pointed to the “devastating” covid lockdowns as an example of how “dissenting voices matter” as the “expert consensus” is “often wrong”.
Jordan accepted Breton’s offer of having his staff provide a briefing on the issues and requested that further information be provided by the EU Commission (1) its “ efforts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce Elon Musk or X Corp. in connection with Mr. Musk’s interview of President Donald Trump;”
(2) “efforts by the European Commission to use EU law to force American companies to censor American speech;”
(3) “any communications the European Commission has had with the Biden-Harris Administration to use EU law as a way to bypass the First Amendment.” no later than 10:00am ET on the 24th of September.