EU at war with Musk after he refuses to be bribed on a secret censorship deal to control citizens
Elon blew the lid of the sheer authoritarianism, corruption and dare we say political evil at the very heart of the European project
In a move that sends shockwaves through the free speech debate and similar to the Apple secret backdoor access attempt, Musk stated over the weekend that X flat out declined an illegal secret deal to drop a $140m fine in return for censoring citizens free speech, simultaneously implying that other major platforms have capitulated to similar ‘suggestions’. This revelation comes amid an intense regulatory crackdown by the EU on tech platforms.
The secret pact to sensor speech
According to Musk, the European Commission proposed a clandestine arrangement. If X agreed to censor content behind the scenes, secretly without public knowledge, it would be spared from financial penalties, specifically related to the platform’s contentious blue check verification system.
X’s refusal positions the platform as a staunch holdout against what Musk views as governmental overreach and a threat to global free expression. This has echos of Apple and their refusal to give back door access to backups secretly without citizens knowledge across the globe.
DSA Non-Compliance
Musk’s explosive claim was made in direct response to the European Commission announcing its preliminary findings that X is non-compliant with the Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU’s landmark legislation designed to police large online platforms.
The EC, led by officials like Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager and Commissioner Thierry Breton, has detailed several key areas where they believe X is failing:
Misleading Verification: The EC found that X’s current “verified accounts” design is misleading. By allowing anyone to purchase a checkmark, the system risks being exploited by malicious actors, deceiving users who believe the checks signify trustworthiness.
Lack of Transparency: X is accused of failing to provide a functional and adequate repository for advertisements, a requirement intended to boost transparency and allow researchers to investigate online advertising risks.
Data Access Obstruction: The platform is also cited for imposing high fees and cumbersome processes, effectively blocking researchers from accessing public data via the API, a key pillar of the DSA’s transparency mandate.
Commissioner Breton emphasised that the old meaning of Bluechecks, reliable sources of information is gone, and the new system ‘deceive[s] users’ and infringes on the DSA.
It’s Apple all over again
Apple are currently in round 2 of their legal battle with the UK government relating to giving them access to all users backups. As with Musk, Apple also refused and like Musk simultaneously blew the lid of what other major providers have no doubt agreed to without informing users.
US Government livid with Europe overreach on American companies…again
Despite Starmers statement in the Oval Office that he would never want to overreach onto American citizens or companies, despite attacking Apple and others for huge fines via Ofcom, this is another example of direct interference from Europe with America.
Top officials in the current U.S. administration have strongly criticised the European Union’s actions, framing the fine against X as an ‘attack on American tech platforms’ and an attempt to pressure the company into censorship.
Several U.S. government officials have voiced their opinions regarding the EU’s actions against X. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the fine as an attack on American tech platforms and the American people. Vice President J.D. Vance characterised the fine as being for ‘not engaging in censorship’. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr called it a tax on Americans to subsidise Europe. Additionally, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick also reportedly opposed the fine. These responses confirm the growing anger between U.S. officials and the EU, with the former supporting Elon Musk’s view that the EU is exceeding its authority and impacting free speech.
EU add account now suspended
Following the publishing of the fine and the attempt of secret censorship, the EC has lost access to its control panel for buying and tracking ads.
“Your ad account has been terminated,” X’s head of product, Nikita Bier, wrote on X.
Bier accused the EU executive of trying to amplify its own social media post about the fine on X by trying “to take advantage of an exploit in our Ad Composer, to post a link that deceives users into thinking it’s a video and to artificially increase its reach.”
The stakes are astronomical
This is more than just a public relations skirmish. The EC’s investigation is a formal process, and if its preliminary views are confirmed, the financial penalties could be catastrophic for X. The Digital Services Act allows the Commission to impose fines of up to 6% of the provider’s total worldwide annual turnover.
While X has the opportunity to respond and defend itself before any final decision, the stakes are clear; capitulation, a massive fine, or a protracted legal battle over the future of platform moderation and free speech.
Be under no illusion, free speech and freedom of expression are under relentless attack by the EU, unless of course your speech aligns with what they permit.