EU Threatens Musk With Sanctions Over Suspending Media…After Ignoring Media Bans Under Old Twitter

Twitter Logo

Despite my support for Elon Musk’s continuing efforts to reduce censorship and restore free speech protections on Twitter, I have been critical of some of his moves from his use of polls on restoring certain posters to the suspensions of media figures this week. However, this morning, I was struck by the European Union (EU) rushing into the controversy to threaten, again, sanctions against Musk. The EU is apparently aghast that Twitter could suspend media even temporarily after ignoring the bans on conservative media for years under the old management.

I understand Musk’s view of such tracking as a form of doxxing (particularly after a man reportedly used the information to attack the car with one of his children inside). Doxxing has long been subject to suspension. Indeed, figures connected with mainstream media from CNN to the Washington Post have been previously accused of doxxing. Liberal groups were accused of doxxing conservative justices and others, including dangerously posting information on the children of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. It does not seem to matter when the targets are conservative, Republican, or libertarian.

Figures who have long advocated the banning of others with opposing views are some of the loudest objecting in the wake of the doxxing controversy. Washington Post Taylor Lorenz expressed fear that she could be next. It may not be a groundless fear since Lorenz has been previously accused of doxxing others and described the reintroduction of free speech protections for others as the opening of “the gates of hell.”

However, it was the appearance of the EU that was most jarring. We have been discussing efforts by figures like Hillary Clinton to enlist European countries to force Twitter to restore censorship rules. Unable to rely on corporate censorship or convince users to embrace censorship, Clinton and others are resorting to good old-fashioned state censorship, even asking other countries to censor the speech of American citizens. It is an easy case to make given the long criminalization of speech in countries like France, Germany, and England.

The EU responded immediately by threatening Musk that restoring free speech could result in immediate sanctions or an entire ban.  Now, EU commissioner Vera Jourova warned that the EU’s Digital Services Act was preparing to act to defend press freedom: “Elon Musk should be aware of that. There are red lines. And sanctions, soon.”

Jourova’s self-righteous tirade was almost comical given the EU’s long-standing attacks on free speech and silence of prior media suspensions. Jourova insisted “[The] EU’s Digital Services Act requires respect of media freedom and fundamental rights. This is reinforced under our Media Freedom Act.”

Really? Where was Jourova and the EU when Twitter was aggressively suspending media like the New York Post for publishing the true story of Hunter Biden’s laptop? How about the slew of conservative writers and experts barred for questioning official accounts on issues ranging from Covid to climate change?

Not surprisingly, the EU is threatening to use the unprecedented anti-free speech law recently passed by the body.

For years, some of us have denounced the EU’s efforts to pass the Digital Services Act, a roadmap for state censorship on the Internet. It is the Western embrace of Chinese style speech controls on the Internet. The chief censor in the West has been Breton, who has shown open contempt for free speech values.

Breton has made no secret that he views free speech as a danger coming from the United States that needs to be walled off from the Internet. He previously declared that, with the DSA, the EU is now able to prevent the Internet from again becoming a place for largely unregulated free speech, which he referred to as the “Wild West” period of the Internet.

Jourova has also been a leading anti-free speech voice globally. She has pressed the United States for greater and greater censorship, declaring “democracies may die in noise and cacophony.” She wanted the tidy silence and order that comes from state imposed censorship.

Now, however, Jourova is deeply upset that some are being suspended as part of an anti-doxxing rule. Of course, the past suspension of writers like Greg Piper, Alex Berenson, and others was not nearly as concerning for the EU. The “red line” was only crossed when favored media were subject to such suspensions. The fact that this comes soon after threatening Musk not to restore free speech rights only makes the EU’s position more maddeningly conflicted and obtuse.

While I disagree with the scope of this action, I still support his efforts at Twitter in the face of an all-out-war declared by an alliance of political, media, and business interests. Musk has dismantled one of the most massive censorship systems in the world. Many of us in the free speech community will not hesitate to call him out when he is wrong, but the EU and many of these anti-free speech figures can spare us the transparent outrage after years of supporting censorship.


192 thoughts on “EU Threatens Musk With Sanctions Over Suspending Media…After Ignoring Media Bans Under Old Twitter”

  1. Turley is critical of Musk’s suspending these journalists, yet he “understands” the concerns with doxing? Seems to be a bit of a contradiction there. As for the EU, if those leaders didn’t have hypocrisy as their main attribute, they’d have no values at all. Their idol Zelensky is banning all opposition media in his country as he valiantly fights for “democracy,” and the EU fools are wrecking their own economies to bail out Nazi Ukraine. Several EU countries are jailing people for speaking out against the trans takeover of language and childrearing. There is no freedom of speech in Europe as it slowly slides down that path it shed blood to avoid in the 1940s.

  2. If we had a real President, he’d tell the Europeans, “If free speech isn’t worth anything, then neither are you. We’re done with NATO.”

    The Germans are sold out to Beijing. The French are becoming a nation of sub-Saharan no-go zones. Belgium is worse. The Brits have made the Star Chamber great, again. Sad to say it because I love European history and culture, but it is what it is. Let the freeloaders pay for their own wars.

    Only the Swedes appear to be resisting the slide–finally. The Swedes!! The Swedes are putting the Brits to shame! I can hardly believe it. Only the Eastern Europeans have any gumption, so just build a new alliance with them instead.

  3. I lived in Europe in mid 1970s as a teen. One of the most impactful experiences was traveling to the DDR by auto, spending three days in Berlin. One of the days was spent in East Berlin, beyond Checkpoint Charlie. Those who have traveled there before the wall was torn down understand that it was not just a wall. There was a minefield, razor wire, dogs, guard towers and many other obstacles for anyone who would dare take their chances to leave.

    We stayed past dark and were approached by teens and younger Germans who were willing to take the risk to ask us about the news of fashion, the latest music, etc. They were hungry for information. What songs are popular? What are they wearing? Tell us about what it is like where you live? They were hungry for information.

    Leaving, I observed very dark and bombed out neighborhoods, still remaining from the last days of the Second World War. There were three thousand pounds of rubble for every man woman and child. Complete destruction. The government did not have the resources to have it removed decades after the war ended.

    One entered the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (DDR) from Germany by way of Checkpoint Alpha. On the other side of the gate were Russian and East German soldiers. Deep inside the country was Berlin, completely surrounded by a communist nation, an island, half American Sector and half Communist. Next was Checkpoint Bravo. The foreign travelers then entered the American sector or West Berlin. CheckPoint Charlie was the crossing from West Berlin and East Berlin. There was a sign that said, “You are leaving the American sector.”

    What was the reason for the collapse of the wall and later the Soviet Union? There have been many who have posited their ideas. Personally, think it was as much blue jeans and rock and roll music (a longing for freedom) as much as politicians, though one could argue that Pope Paul II played and integral role as well as other leaders who had intestinal fortitude. The people did it themselves.

    There is no short supply of tyrants and despots who want nothing less than to crush the human spirit and inflict control of the individual human. The spirit and longing for freedom of those who lived in suppression in the DDR and the Berliners behind the wall finally prevailed and they serve as an example of how a people, who have experienced full suppression reach a limit. Truth. They want true truth.

    What makes our present situation so dangerous are the tyrants who have learned and adapted. The new threat is totalitarianism. Unlike tyranny, the victims are brainwashed by mass media. They gladly follow. If a tyrant goes down in a totalitarian setting, someone else will take their place. The process of conditioning is not unlike a cult. How does the cult leader(s) hold power over the victim? They control the environment, they control the narrative, they close off dissent. If dissent manages to get through, their apologists spin the information. They use sleep deprivation, disruption of schedule and routine. They keep moving the goal posts. Those who are conditioned slowly adapt in order to survive. The conditioning is predicated on an idea or ideals. To do that, first they have to rip up the cords that bind society together.

    Some of the methods of control of this new movement are: Climate Change, transgenderism, Marxism, Equity, and Pandemic. We the citizens are to give up our individuality for the benefit of all. They tell us to be ashamed of our form of government and all of our history, we are to feel guilty. They hate religion, individualism, meritocracy, and families. Religion because it says that there is a higher power and that this earth is but a vapor and that humanity is flawed. Individualism because they are not as easily controlled. Meritocracy because an individual, no matter their station in life, given enough work and will power can pull themselves up without the help of the government. Families because they are the fundamental unit of society and each family is different and family members hold various viewpoints apart from the narrative.

    Many of those preaching climate change, travel the world in private jets (spewing out carbon), have multiple mansions on the beach (I thought they were worried about rising oceans, shouldn’t they be buying oceanfront property in the Southwest?) Sure the climate is changing. The Carlsbad Caverns were a barrier reef in the dried up ocean that is now located in the Chihuahua Desert. They propose to shut down manufacturing in the U.S.A. and Europe so that China and India (the biggest polluters and are building more and more coal plants each year). Those who are pushing this are benefiting financially in a big way at the expense of the little people. The Transgender tyranny and the subsequent punishments for daring to speak the plain truth about it is bizarre. Thousands and thousands of years of humanity and only in the past ten to fifteen years in the western world do we have a problem. Only in an affluent (and spoiled) society could this be pulled off. One of their real goals is to make religion of any kind, but especially Christianity, illegal because the Holy Writ speaks clearly on the subject.

    They destroy the idea of a person who works hard to get ahead and have nice things is doing something evil. They should be happy to spend 10-12 hours a day at their work so that they can pay for some lump on a log to have a universal income. One works and the other smokes dope and surfs the net. Yeah, that will work.

    The pandemic was a drill for the next play. What will that be? Beat the population into submission through a constant barrage of repetitive mantras and sooner or later, a majority of folks are mindless and acting mindlessly. How dare anyone dissent. This is Science!! The scientist is settled! You can’t argue with science. Those who live in the science world and who hold a classic view of science understand that dissent is the foundation of science. The researcher’s job is to challenge and dissent. How else could anything new be discovered? The sad reality is that most fo the grant monies are controlled by a few gatekeepers in government and large corporations. If there is a scientist who swims against the stream and his or her research is detrimental to the narrative, they will face loss of job, drying up of grant money and in some cases, they will be attacked by hitmen scientists who are paid by the corporation. It is easier to cancel them. Shut them up!

    Without freedom of speech and freedom of press there is no hope for fragile humankind. Without standards of right and wrong, society will crumble into rubble. There is need to look no further than human history for the past few thousand years. Shelley’s poem, Ozymandias says much about the fate we face in the not too distant future if we do not open our eyes, seek facts and learn to think for ourselves. “Look on my works (inscribed on the broken statue in the desert), ye mighty and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare the lone and level sands stretch far away.”

  4. This stood out to me: “While I disagree with the scope of this action, I still support his efforts at Twitter in the face of an all-out-war declared by an alliance of political, media, and business interests.” Yes, it is an all-out war, with one side wanting total control of correct thought and speech through total control of all of civilization’s power and information centers (academia, primary education, government, media, entertainment, even sports), and the other side generally favoring freedom and an undermining of the increasingly fascist deep state which already totally controls the legacy media (NYT, WaPo, LAT, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, etc.). All of this nice debate on here using words and arguments is the prelude. What’s to come will be more along the lines of: “Forget the debate, just start shooting people like Musk and Trump and anyone who supports them because they represent an existential threat to *us*.” It may take a few years to get to that point, but we are moving there fast and I believe we will be there within five years tops.

  5. Elon Musk: “By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people.”

    Also Elon Musk: “Twitter policy is freedom of speech”

    But he has censored loads of tweets that contain legal speech and even banned people for legal speech. Musk is a liar.

    1. ” If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. “

      You may not know it but that would require a constitutional amendment.

    2. Musk is attempting to comply with the law in the EU. Which is bad law.

      Regardless, Twitter has some power to push censorious places like the EU to back down – but not absolute power to do so.

      We are in the process of developing new rules for twitter.

      This is an important process.

      If Musk actually tired to set twitter up as the free speech platform he talked about in April – those like you on the left would destroy him.

      He is trying to take Twitter as it is, eliminiate the blatant political bias, choose battles he can win for greater free speech.
      Make twitter rules based, transparent, make decisions reviewable.

      This is a process and a destination – we are not there yet.

      Nor despite the rhetoric is that the most important objective. There are lots of things going on that are not making the news.

      I do find it interesting. I left twitter 2 years ago because it had become a bitter cesspool.
      Shortly after Musk took over I returned and it was much more pleasant.

      In the past few days it has gotten more hateful again – because the left is filling twitter with “hate speech”

  6. The EU is a direct and mortal enemy of the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, America and America.

    To accept the EU is to accept communism.

      1. If push comes to shove, we can probably depend on George to protect America while worrying about you supporting the enemy.

      2. Jut because you disagree with someone does not make them a white nationalist.
        Just because they espouse an idea you do not like does not mean you get to defame them.

        I disagree with George sometimes. I beleive he stretches the constitution a bit.
        Though some of his more offensive remarks are correct. Whether I like that our not.

          1. Mama’s Boy, report yourself to Professor Turley for calling someone a white nationalist.

            This is your statement that you deleted from the blog: “Forwarding to Jonathan, so that he can weigh in on these sorts of uncivil comments.”

            You are a hypocrite. Now report that as well.

            1. I didn’t forward anything. Once again, you’re confusing two different people.

              I call George what he is. He is a bigot. His is a misogynist. He is a white nationalist. Feel free to report my comments yourself if you see cause to do so.

              1. You have no credibility. That was from Turley’s blog in my inbox and missing from the blog. It has your fingerprints on it Mama’s Boy, and the last time you tried to lie you finally had to admit that you were lying.

                I don’t need to report comments. We have anti-Semites that make stupid comments. Enigma brought up an old racist comment. We have dumb leftist comments that don’t get anything right. Then we have you.

              2. If those things are true of George you should be able to demonstrate them.
                You have not so far.

          2. So were the Founders and Framers patriotic Americans?

            Did they legislate the Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802 (four iterations)?

            Martin Luther King was not a legitimate PhD and did not legitimately earn and obtain a doctoral degree as proven by a committee appointed by Boston University which “conducted the investigation with scholarly thoroughness, scrupulous attention to detail and a determination not to be influenced by non-scholarly consideration.”

            Martin Luther King’s duplicity and misrepresentation to his family, his congregation and the nation are irrefutable facts.

            “A committee of scholars appointed by Boston University concluded today that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree at the university 36 years ago.

            “There is no question,” the committee said in a report to the university’s provost, “but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation by appropriating material from sources not explicitly credited in notes, or mistakenly credited, or credited generally and at some distance in the text from a close paraphrase or verbatim quotation.”

            But the committee did recommend that a letter stating its finding be placed with the official copy of Dr. King’s dissertation in the university’s library.

            The four-member committee was appointed by the university a year ago to determine whether plagiarism charges against Dr. King that had recently surfaced were in fact true. Today the university’s provost, Jon Westling, accepted the committee’s recommendations and said its members had “conducted the investigation with scholarly thoroughness, scrupulous attention to detail and a determination not to be influenced by non-scholarly consideration.”

            The dissertation at issue is “A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman.” Dr. King wrote it in 1955 as part of his requirements for a doctor of philosophy degree, which he subsequently received from the university’s Division of Religious and Theological Studies.”

            – New York Times, October 11, 1991

          3. And how does that comment by George show he is a white nationalist ?

            I would separately note that outside of the anglosphere nearly the entire world is made of countries that are culturally and racially nearly homogeneous.

            I personally value diversity.
            Though I would note that diversity REQUIRES substantial individual freedom and highly constrained government.
            Greater diversity means LESS share culture and values, and government can only legitimately act within the domain of our shared values.

            Regardless, George is advocating for a viewpoint shared by 90% of the people in the world – very few of whom are white.

            1. Apparently you don’t recognize that depatriating all Black Americans and sending them to Liberia as the act of a white nationalist. OK.

              1. “Apparently you don’t recognize that depatriating all Black Americans and sending them to Liberia as the act of a white nationalist.”


                That does not mean I think doing so would have been a wise choice. Nor by 1860 a viable choice.

                Just because I disagree with something, does not make it evil, or racist, or white nationalist.

                I beleive that diversity is on NET beneficial – but you are blind if you think it is trouble free or normal.

                A bit more than 1/8th of the world is caucasian.
                Meaningful diversity exists only within that caucasian world, and only in the Anglo parts of it.

                Accross the world peoples separate according to race, an religion, and culture.
                Sucessful nations that do not have 90% supermajorities of on race religion AND culture are rare,

                Unlike YOU I know that when I am arguing for diversity, I am arguing AGAINST global norms.
                I may favor diversity, but I am not prepared to call 95% of the world evil.

  7. There’s no proof that actually happened. Even Turley can’t confirm it. It may just be Elon making stuff up as an excuse to censor his critics.

    Getting all emotional about an incident that can’t be proven it happened is silly at best. Was there a police report? Did he file one?

    1. Can I buy a noun ?
      What did not happen ?
      I am guessing that you are claiming that Musk’s son was not accosted ?
      You do know there is video ?

  8. Not to worry the Europeans may ban Twitter but they won’t have enough electricity to run their laptops anyway. They won’t be able to type with the double layers of gloves on their hands as they sit in the darkness. Those with a wood stove will be the lucky ones. That is if they can afford the wood to put into the stoves. LOL

    Give the Euro Leaders what They want – And leave it so that there is no doubt that They are the ones to blame.

    I ask you. What(?) would happen to a Nation State today if its Internet were to go Off-Line (Dark) for 1 Month.

  10. Twitter will host free debate in the next two years and many on the left are upset about that, whether in the U.S. or in Europe. They are frustrated because they’ve lost their ability to censor conservatives. All the weeping and gnashing of teeth, no matter how they are dressed up, emanate from that frustration.

Leave a Reply