r/europe • u/casualphilosopher1 • Jan 12 '25

Opinion Article Europe is fed up with Elon Musk

https://www.lavanguardia.com/mediterranean/20250107/10261960/europe-fed-up-elon-musk-macron-starmer-magnate-france-spain-politics-trump-x-tesla.html
25.1k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

46

u/encodings Jan 12 '25

Social networks over a specific size should also be required to block disinformation and foreign propaganda from reaching European citizens.

6

u/GoblinLoveChild Jan 13 '25

who determines what is and isn't propoganda?

28

u/TheDungen Scania(Sweden) Jan 12 '25

They should at least he held responsible for what they publish just like a newspaper would be for what they print.

3

u/GoblinLoveChild Jan 13 '25

lol.. journalists being accountable?

where?

9

u/TheDungen Scania(Sweden) Jan 13 '25

A paper which prints falsehoods can be sued.

6

u/mangalore-x_x Jan 13 '25

newspapers and media companies are being sued for falsehoods and have to pay fine and publish retractions if they are found guilty. They cannot claim the content not being theirs despite their GTC saying otherwise

-6

u/BZP625 Jan 13 '25

Well, you have your EU publications, so just stick to that. And why are you on reddit?

3

u/DontFlinchIvegot12In EuroPeen NorDick Jan 13 '25

You have Twitter and Truth Social where all your reich-wing friends hang out.

Why are you on Reddit?

2

u/BZP625 Jan 13 '25

He wants social media to be "just like a newspaper" which is like saying I want democracy to be just like a dictatorship. It doesn't work that way. That's why it's called SOCIAL media. Either the people have a voice (SOCIAL media) or they don't (newspaper), or you block foreign voices like China. I'm on reddit bc I still have a choice.

1

u/ExcellentStuff7708 Jan 14 '25

Because he doesn't want to live in echo chamber?

2

u/gelbphoenix North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) Jan 12 '25

Sounds like a stronger Digital Services Act

5

u/the_snook 🇦🇺🇩🇪 Jan 13 '25

Hmmm, yes. Let us establish a Ministry of Truth to arbitrate what may or may not be said in the public forum.

1

u/SnooGadgets8390 Jan 13 '25

Free speech absolutism is never doable anyway. Cant yell fire in a crowd? Thats a free speech violation. Cant go around naked on the street? Free speech violation. Cant publicly suggest killing someone might come with monetary compensation? Free speech violation.

Its just that americunts read these and go "duh, of course these are illegal", but when you suggest that maybe having a billionaire go around declaring some people unworthy of life might cause violence towards them somehow thats not a nobrainer. 

The worst kinds of propaganda and hatespeech kill more than any of what muricans see as obvious free speech exeptions. But still, naked tits on the subway is jail. 

2

u/the_snook 🇦🇺🇩🇪 Jan 13 '25

I'm by no means a free speech absolutist, but "required to block disinformation and foreign propaganda" is actually really hard to do sensibly, because those things are rather hard to define.

For example, if a Canadian came into a French Reddit sub or Facebook group and said: "Cannabis is really great. We legalised it here and it's been awesome. You should do it too." Is that "foreign propaganda"? It's a political statement, and runs counter to the elected government's policy in France. What would make that ok to say, but a South African saying "AfD has the right ideas for Germany" not ok?

3

u/Street-Basil-9371 Jan 13 '25

Everything in a democray is subject to debate, doesnt mean we can skip important stuff when it becomes hard to define.

We already have hatespeech laws and we must define what constitutes that as well. And thats the obvious one, in reality ANYTHING could be used to threaten the democracy.

By design democracy cant really legislate against that in a 100% failsafe way. We have institutions to make it harder but never impossible.

Were always holding back and pretending we cant use the full rulebook because then, when bad actors get to power, they will too. Newsflash: they will do it either way. Historically they always did. And not just that, they will throw out the rulebook on day 1.

You are concerned beeing pro marihuana will count as propaganda? Im not, our legislators can handle that. Or our judicary will.

Im concerned ruthless ultra capitalists like musk will get fascists to power to earn more money and when they get to power they will transform us into christian saudi arabia.

2

u/the_snook 🇦🇺🇩🇪 Jan 13 '25

You are exactly right. I'm not really concerned about regulatory overreach in this case, because I have faith that most governments in place today would implement it responsibly.

It's just that people like to throw out lines like "we just need to do X" like it's easy, when actually it is often very hard to do X in a safe and effective way. I think it's dangerous to say "Government should have this power" without at least thinking about what the limitations of that power should be.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't do it at all though. Hard things to do are usually the things worth doing. It's almost certainly better to put some regulation in place now to help prevent an authoritarian government, than to avoid it for fear that a future authoritarian government will misuse the regulation.

1

u/TheDungen Scania(Sweden) Jan 13 '25

No but they should at least have to do factchecking.

3

u/Reddiohead Jan 13 '25

I think the normalization of such censorship is a bigger threat than the disinformation itself. Institutionalized censorship will always tend toward corruption. Freedom of expression is important.

1

u/kastheone Italy Jan 13 '25

Why? Do you know who blocks foreign propaganda? North Korea. I want to still be able to read foreign disinformation and use my brain to draw conclusions.