zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. pyrale+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-08-15 11:15:16
I'm going to say something that many here won't like given the usual reaction to European regulation, but social media platforms have enabled multiple foreign influence political campaign operations during election times in Europe, and notably led to the invalidation of the 2024 Romanian presidential election [1].

As of recently, probably bolstered by the new US admin, US social media platforms have taken a more confrontational towards regulators in EU countries where they operate. For instance, Twitter refused to cooperate with a French investigation [2].

It really is unsurprising that European countries muscle up their legislative response to what they see increasingly as media platforms going rogue in support of operations aimed to distort political debate in Europe. The only alternative would be to outright ban US social media and build EU platforms.

[1]: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89lection_pr%C3%A9sidentie...

[2]: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/pixels/article/2025/07/21/x-refuse...

replies(2): >>_heimd+02 >>varisp+l3
2. _heimd+02[view] [source] 2025-08-15 11:29:51
>>pyrale+(OP)
I wouldn't expect many to take issue with your point here. The problem at hand isn't whether or not social media has been a net positive or net negative, the problem is whether the government should be in the business of arresting those who say things the government doesn't want said.

We can deal with social media directly without government censorship and arresting the public. Remove any legal protections that give social media a free pass regarding what is posted on their sites. If we want people's speech to be censored, at a minimum that should be done by the private company who is financially on the hook for what content they allow.

3. varisp+l3[view] [source] 2025-08-15 11:41:00
>>pyrale+(OP)
OSA has nothing to do with prevention of influence though. It's about building scaffolding for mass surveillance.

If it was about influence, there are better ways to handle it, without forcing entire population to give up their personal data to some dodgy "age-check" companies. Many run by foreign hostile intelligence agencies.

replies(1): >>pyrale+l8
◧◩
4. pyrale+l8[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-08-15 12:15:30
>>varisp+l3
I do agree it's not a good way to do it and mass surveillance is part of what we'll get as a result.
[go to top]