Einen Tag, bevor Elon Musk Donald Trump auf X interviewte, hat die EU-Kommission Elon Musk einen langen Drohbrief geschrieben. Die Plattform müsse sich an die EU-Regulierung (Digital Services Act) halten und "schädlichen Content" entfernen (das Risiko für schädlichen Content "einschränken").
Explizit erwähnt werden auch die Proteste in UK und das Interview mit Donald Trump, obwohl diese Ereignisse mit der EU nichts zu tun haben. UK ist aus der EU ausgetreten, nicht mehr Mitglied der EU.
Deswegen werfen einige User auf X der EU unzulässige Einmischung in den US-Wahlkampf vor 😂
Meinungsfreiheit inkludiert nicht das Recht Falschinformationen zu verbreiten oder Menschen zu Straftaten zu animieren. Das ist auch wieder wahr.
Aber das Dilemma ist, wer bestimmt, was falsch und richtig ist? Allzu oft werden die Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit dazu missbraucht, unliebsame Meinungen zu zensurieren.
Deswegen denke ich, man sollte die Meinungsfreiheit auf Social Media so liberal wie nur irgendwie möglich auslegen.
Auch das System von Community Notes, das Twitter/X eingeführt hat, um Falschinformationen mit Richtigstellungen zu annotieren hat sich in der Praxis bewährt und ist meiner Meinung nach ein guter Kompromiss. Der Content bleibt online, aber die Community kann Dinge richtigstellen.
Stellt euch vor Elon Musk wäre woke und würde Kamala Harris interviewen. Dann würde es den Aufschrei der EU-Kommission sicher nicht in dieser Form geben.
Was sagt ihr zum Drohbrief der EU-Kommission just vor dem Interview mit Donald Trump? Dreiste Einmischung der EU-Kommission in den US-Wahlkampf oder legitime Warnung an Elon Musk, Content im Sinne der EU-Regulierung (DSA) zu zensurieren, um EU-Bürger vor Falschinformationen zu schützen?
EU Commission writes threat letter to Elon Musk to abide to the Digital Services Act (DSA), censor / mitigate "harmful content"
https://x.com/davidmarcus/status/1823076162815574196
https://x.com/marcfriedrich7/status/1823067109540405495
https://x.com/TomaszFroelich/status/1823047943571808359
https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/1823052466599969105
https://x.com/GPrime85/status/1823060624605430202
Transcript (Letter of Thierry Breton, EU Commission to Elon Musk)
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Thierry Breton
Brussels, 12 August 2024
Dear Mr. Musk,
I am writing to you in the context of recent events in the United Kingdom and in relation to the planned broadcast on your platform X of a live conversation between a US presidential candidate and yourself, which will also be accessible to users in the EU.
I understand that you are currently doing a stress test of the platform. In this context, I am compelled to remind you of the due diligence obligations set out in the Digital Services Act (DSA), as outlined in my previous letter. As the individual entity ultimately controlling a platform with over 300 million users worldwide, of which one third in the EU, that has been designated as a Very Large Online Platform, you have the legal obligation to ensure X’s compliance with EU law and in particular the DSA in the EU.
This notably means ensuring, on one hand, that freedom of expression and of information, including media freedom and pluralism, are effectively protected and, on the other hand, that all proportionate and effective mitigation measures are put in place regarding the amplification of harmful content in connection with relevant events, including live streaming, which, if unaddressed, might increase the risk profile of X and generate detrimental effects on civic discourse and public security. This is important against the background of recent examples of public unrest brought about by the amplification of content that promotes hatred, disorder, incitement to violence, or certain instances of disinformation.
It also implies i) informing EU judicial and administrative authorities without undue delay on the measures taken to address their orders against content considered illegal, according to national and/or EU law, ii) taking timely, diligent, non-arbitrary and objective action upon receipt of notices by users considering certain content illegal, iii) informing users concerning the measures taken upon receipt of the relevant notice, and iv) publicly reporting about content moderation measures.
In this respect, I note that the DSA obligations apply without exceptions or discrimination to the moderation of the whole user community and content of X (including yourself as a user with over 190 million followers) which is accessible to EU users and should be fulfilled in line with the risk-based approach of the DSA, which requires greater due diligence in case of a foreseeable increase of the risk profile.
As you know, formal proceedings are already ongoing against X under the DSA, notably in areas linked to the dissemination of illegal content and the effectiveness of the measures taken to combat disinformation.
As the relevant content is accessible to EU users and being amplified also in our jurisdiction, we cannot exclude potential spillovers in the EU. Therefore, we are monitoring the potential risks in the EU associated with the dissemination of content that may incite violence, hate and racism in conjunction with major political or societal events around the world, including debates and interviews in the context of elections.
Let me clarify that any negative effect of illegal content on X in the EU, which could be attributed to the ineffectiveness of the way in which X applies the relevant provisions of the DSA, may be relevant in the context of the ongoing proceedings and of the overall assessment of X’s compliance with EU law. This is in line with what has already been done in the recent past, for example in relation to the repercussions and amplification of terrorist content or content that incites violence, hate and racism in the EU, such as in the context of the recent riots in the United Kingdom.
I therefore urge you to promptly ensure the effectiveness of your systems and to report measures taken to my team. My services and I will be extremely vigilant to any evidence that points to breaches of the DSA and will not hesitate to make full use of our toolbox, including by adopting interim measures, should it be warranted to protect EU citizens from serious harm.
Yours sincerely,
Thierry Breton
Cc: Linda Yaccarino, CEO of X
Interview Elon Musk with Donald Trump on X
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1823218454369124491
English
One day before Elon Musk interviewed Donald Trump on X, the EU Commission sent Elon Musk a long threatening letter. The platform would have to comply with EU regulation (Digital Services Act) and remove "harmful content" (to "mitigate the risk of harmful content").
The protests in the UK and the interview with Donald Trump are also explicitly mentioned, although these events have nothing to do with the EU. The UK has left the EU and is no longer a member state.
That is why some users on X are accusing the EU of undue interference in the US election 😂
Freedom of speech does not include the right to spread misinformation or incite people to commit crimes. That is true.
But the dilemma is, who decides what is right and wrong? All too often, the boundaries of freedom of speech are abused to censor unwelcome opinions.
That's why I think freedom of speech on social media should be interpreted as liberally as possible.
The Community Notes system that Twitter/X introduced to annotate false information with corrections has also proven itself in practice and is a good compromise in my opinion. The content remains online, but the community can correct things.
Imagine Elon Musk being woke and interviewing Kamala Harris instead of Trump. Then there would certainly not be the outcry from the EU Commission in this form.
What do you think of the EU Commission's threatening letter just before the interview with Donald Trump? Is it brazen interference by the EU Commission in the US election campaign or a legitimate warning to Elon Musk to censor content in line with EU regulations (DSA) in order to protect EU citizens from misinformation?