The European Parliament (EP) Special Committee on a censorship initiative known as “the European Democracy Shield” has published a working document, “on protecting European democracy and our values.”
The pretext for the initiative is the Brussels bureaucracy’s assertion that the bloc and member countries have been subjected to “escalating” threats in terms of foreign information manipulation and interference, hybrid attacks, and disinformation – originating from “third-country actors.”
The premise is that it is not EU’s own, many, anti-free speech regulations and policies, like the Digital Services Act (DSA), that are an actual threat to European democracy – not to mention “our” values – but rather, to deflect elsewhere.
That brand of political cynicism and hypocrisy aside for now – what the document goes into are policy recommendations as to how the “Shield” might be used.
One of them is setting up a new, “independent” structure that would deal with whatever the EU decides is foreign manipulation and interference (there’s an acronym – FIMI – but in reality it is clear the “definition” is very broad, and could cover legal and lawful free speech).
The document further speaks about FIMI-action being supported by none other than by-and-large, at this point in time, disgraced “fact-checkers.”
What the EU’s latest use of taxpayer money, namely, producing this initiative and the documents along with the “recommendations” is geared toward is giving business to the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN).
This is a network of “fact-checking organizations” on the continent funded by the European Commission. And it just so happens, that several members are part of Meta’s third-party fact-checking program in Europe.
Those include Agence France-Presse (AFP), and Full Fact.
Back to business at hand, the entire endeavor seems akin to that, “Russians, Russians Everywhere!” Toy Story meme.
When the rapporteur for the Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield, Sweden’s MEP Tomas Tobe, tries to convince his audiences that the “Shield” is worth funding and maintaining, he goes to the “safe space” of setting up yet another new agency – to reportedly combat Russian “bots and disinformation.”
As far as everyday politics goes, it’s great. It hits all the right talking points, that the EU has been building up for years anyway.
But – when the “Shield” calls back on the DSA – a censorship law – it becomes a bit too much to claim that very same law is what Europeans should count on “continuing to uphold” their own at this point appearing increasingly flimsy, “right to free speech.”
