Konstantin Gisler (5:02)

No migrants, More in.

Christel Schaldemosa (5:04)

No Europe without Christianity. Also with Russia.

EU Scream Host (5:12)

Welcome to EU Scream, the podcast that guides you through stories coming from the eu. We talk about the news a bit differently and with people who really know.

James Kanter (5:21)

What they're talking about.

EU Scream Host (5:23)

I'm James Kantor. This is episode 114, High Noon for the Digital Services act with MEPs Sandro Gozzi and Christel Chaldamosa.

James Kanter (5:39)

You were part of this first group of MEPs. Crystal it was the first official visit to Washington. What was the mood like?

Christel Schaldemosa (5:48)

We were kind of excited to go there, the first official delegation and we would of course talk about tech regulation. The internal market committee is the one responsible. So I think we had some kind of expectations to get an impression about how the new administration looked at things and we got a clear impression. I have to say I was a bit shocked. First and foremost, you felt that when we spoke to people, no matter whether it was in the State Department or in the Federal Trade Commission or even in the White House. You could sense how the, the mood has changed. And that is how it is in US when you get a new president and therefore a new administration. But this time it was a complete shift. And I sense that either you were very much on the Trump line and then you supported him and maybe added even 20% to really show your support, or you kind of felt that you couldn't speak out.

James Kanter (6:56)

Among others, you met Jim Jordan, this ultra conservative member of Congress. Jordan's very close to Donald Trump. He even says studying online disinformation is a form of censoring conservatives. How did Jim Jordan react to your presentation of what Europe is doing?

Christel Schaldemosa (7:19)

It was clear that he even said it. This sentence is something that really surprised me. He said that even the Draghi report, the one that Mario Drago made about the European competitiveness, he said that even that report was anti American. So for me, that said it all. Everything we're doing in EU that is not helping us is seen as being anti American. And he was very, I mean, he was, he was blunt, direct as he is as a politician. That's fine, I can live with that. But, you know, it was this, that no matter what we said, I had the impression that he did not really think we were right. It was kind of, the Americans are so much better than the Europeans and everything we do is wrong. And. Yeah, so it was this complete change of mood and change of perception that has come into the White House now and the Congress.

James Kanter (8:22)

Yes. I mean, it's an extraordinary thing that Jim Jordan said that. Because a lot of people on the center left in Europe would say that the Draghi report was textbook neoliberalism.

Christel Schaldemosa (8:33)

Exactly, exactly.

James Kanter (8:34)

And so suddenly you have MAGA saying this is somehow anti American. Anti American. And.

Christel Schaldemosa (8:41)

Exactly.

James Kanter (8:42)

Because we're talking about the Digital Services act, the dsa. Jordan himself is a fount of disinformation. He has an astonishing record of spreading, you know, harmful narratives, even conspiracy theories about COVID 19, about the idea that Trump won the 2020 US election. He supports these Kremlin aligned theories on Ukraine and the idea that the Biden family is involved. I know there's a protocol to these meetings, so I guess you didn't bring up these issues.

Christel Schaldemosa (9:14)

No, we didn't. But we were also quite direct towards him. It was a closed meeting. And we defended, of course, the DSA and the DMA tried to discuss freedom of speech with him, trying to let him know that DSA is not about centering anybody. But he said, you Know, he said that even having the law had a kind of a chilling effect. That's what he said. And then I said to him, well, we also sense the other way around that, you know, that the way they're acting is also having an impact on us, on people who disagree. So they also try to not speak so freely. So their attempt to create freedom of speech the way they do it has the opposite effect, in fact, because people, they don't dare speak out freely. And I told him that.

James Kanter (10:06)

Yeah. And when it comes to that chilling effect, I mean, what we are talking about here very directly is that women have less of a voice in the online sphere and vulnerable minorities have less of a voice in the online sphere.

EU Scream Host (10:18)

But that seems to.

James Kanter (10:20)

That seems to be what Jim Jordan wants. So that's a very tough thing. I mean, how far does one get by reminding him of that? Because it's exactly the goal that he is trying to reach, the suppression of other points of view.

Christel Schaldemosa (10:33)

But, you know, the impression from my side is it's kind of when I go on X, that's the same. You know, I only see conspiracy theories. I only see Elon Musk. I only see people. If you dare to say anything against Trump and the Trump administration and what they're doing, you're attacked. I'm not so active there. I just try to follow. And that was the sense also in Washington, D.C. that if you try to go up against what they're doing, you are not really welcome. And everything we are doing in the EU is seen as an attempt to be anti American, which is simply not the truth. And that was very, very scary. Very scary.

EU Scream Host (11:13)

You raise the issue of X and.

James Kanter (11:15)

X has become more involved than ever in European elections, promoting extremist parties like the IFD in Germany. Meta is abandoning fact checking, which is a good, if not the best tool for mitigating the risk of disinformation. I think any reasonable observer crystal would agree that X and Meta are going further onto the wrong side rather than the right side of the Digital Services act, the dsa, which is now a couple of years old now, as the chief negotiator on the DSA at the European Parliament, as chair of the Working Group on the implementation of the dsa, how do you feel about what amounts to open defiance by X and Meta?

Christel Schaldemosa (12:04)

Things are really developing in the wrong direction. I mean, the DSA was an attempt to create, first and foremost, a level playing field for the platforms, a true internal market on how to take down illegal content and how to act when you had Harmful content. And I really, really do think that the DSA is a good law because what we did was we made an arm length principle in place on how to enforce the rules and even that is not accepted.

James Kanter (12:32)

It's even different state to state in the eu. It's quite a flexible law.

Christel Schaldemosa (12:36)

It is and it is, because what is illegal is not something we harmonized. So they are clearly going up against the, of the European Union. I mean, I think that they will fight the DSA until the day Trump is not any longer in the White House. And they will probably use it as a negotiating tool between EU and United States once we will go into a discussion about tariffs and other things. So honestly, I'm a bit scared about the development.

James Kanter (13:05)

One of the things about the behavior of Ex and Meta, as I was describing it since the passage of the law, is that the law itself doesn't seem to have a dissuasive power on them. They seem empowered to do sort of the opposite.

Christel Schaldemosa (13:21)

But we thought so, we thought so at lean, at least with the, with the level of fines that it would have this impact that they, you know, in fact, what we did with the DSA was we tried to learn from the way things are done in the United States that huge fines should prevent companies from not complying with the law. But apparently it has not been the case. But I also have to say that X, but maybe even more Meta has this zigzag course because at a certain time the community standards at Meta were so small you couldn't do anything without being risking that your post would be taken down. And that's not the dsa. You know, you have a very broad way of working. You can say a lot of things. We're not even saying that fact checking is the tool to be used in order to go up against disinformation and misinformation.

James Kanter (14:11)

Yeah, you can choose.

Christel Schaldemosa (14:12)

You can choose. You need to have measures in place and fact checking is a very good instrument. But if you can find others, you're allowed to do so. But not even that is what they're doing.

James Kanter (14:24)

When it comes to the European Commission, which is the enforcer of the treaties, which is going to be presumably deciding on the open cases concerning X and Meta under the dsa. What's a good decision and what would be a bad decision in your view?

Christel Schaldemosa (14:40)

A good decision would be if you're an ordinary user of X or Meta's platforms, you from time to time see things you think not should be there. So I think a good decision would be to Let Meta and X know that they're not complying with the law and give them a little, not too much time to comply, but make sure that they do comply, that they do have in place measures to counteract disinformation, for instance, or systemic risks towards mental health issues or democracy or whatever. And at the moment it's difficult to see that they are in place. So we need some rulings that makes it clear for me to annex that they have to comply with the law.

James Kanter (15:23)

I mean, it takes a while to get to that fining stage where it's 6% of your worldwide turnover, which is a lot of money in the cases of these companies, which are the wealthiest in the world. But it does seem like if the EU were to do that, it would send a very strong message. But then again, they might turn around and say, you know, we're not going to comply.

Christel Schaldemosa (15:45)

But the thing is that if you look at the gdpr, I mean, it took some time before the fines started to come and in the beginning they were small, and then they became bigger and bigger. And I guess that we will see the same with the DSA, that they will not start by fining up to 6%. They probably go lower, but that is also a problem in itself because then they will count on that and put it into the budget. But the thing is, I honestly truly believe that both for X and Meta and other platforms, the European market is interesting. We have 450 million citizens and we are not all on all the platforms, but they earn a lot of money on us. So I am quite sure that they want to stay in Europe and then they have to comply.

James Kanter (16:32)

And again, that implies that you go beyond the fines and you actually ban them from your markets, which is also possible under the dsa. At least in theory.

Christel Schaldemosa (16:39)

At least in theory. But before we come there, I don't think we will get there, but ultimately there is this possibility. But they have to go up against everything we do and we need to make sure that it is not compromising freedom of speech, etc. The fundamental rights is very important for us also in eu, so it is, in my opinion, more a theoretical option rather than a real option.

James Kanter (17:01)

Now, on this slowness that you've identified when it comes to the decision making, we keep hearing that these decisions on X and Meta and on a variety of other open DSA cases will be made at the highest levels of European politics, rather than by the enforcement officials at the European Commission who are supposed to be taking a view and making these decisions. So how concerned are you that Europe will not enforce the DSA strongly on US Companies like X and Meta or even not at all, or even be traded off as part of these efforts to relieve the tensions with the Trump administration over trade and all the other variety of things that Donald Trump is threatening towards Europe.

Christel Schaldemosa (17:47)

Well, I've really thought it over and I really truly believe that by the end of the day the EU Commission will make sure that if the meter and other American platforms are not complying, they will let them know and they will be fined and they will have to adjust accordingly. I have honestly difficulties believing that the commission would use our laws in order to trade with the United States on other topics. I simply cannot see that happening because the consequences of that is horrible to the European society.

James Kanter (18:30)

What a precedent.

Christel Schaldemosa (18:32)

Exactly. Why should we then not then we can't go against TikTok and Telegram and other platforms that will come up later. So I think their countries like China.

James Kanter (18:43)

Would just make that part of trade standoffs. So you would set a precedent where other countries would just do exactly the same.

Christel Schaldemosa (18:50)

Exactly. And it would also be more difficult for the European Commission to go up against EU countries who are not complying with rule of law if we are not doing it ourselves as a system and we gave the commission the power to enforce it. And if they're not using it, then the whole system will break down and then we end up going back and use the old fashioned rules for the internal market. That it is a country where the company is having its headquarters that has to make sure that the law is compliant and then we know for sure that nothing really will happen. So they have to honestly, they have to make sure that the rules are complied. Virkonen who is responsible? Henne Wirkennen Commissioner Vice President Henne Wirkonen she's very Finnish rule, you know, calm and not so outspoken and maybe that could calm things down a little bit.

EU Scream Host (19:41)

Although she canceled a recent trip to.

James Kanter (19:43)

The United States, so she must be working very hard on how she presents Europe's digital policy to the Americans because the first trip that she was going to make there didn't happen. So we're still waiting to see how that lands.

Christel Schaldemosa (20:01)

Well, we are still waiting to see, but when I hear her speaking in committees, she seems quite committed to make sure that the rules are enforced in a strong and important manner. So I still have faith in the EU commission and in her. I have to say though that I do think that they are too slow. We need to speed up. And some of these investigations has been going on for months and months and months. And the other day in the internal market and consumer protection Committee, I asked Commission, I mean, if we can see changes from today and before the dsa, because I think it might be a little bit difficult for ordinary people to see the difference.

James Kanter (20:45)

And Prabhat Aggarwal, who was representing the commission, he tried to assure people and to assure you that he was moving these cases along. We are not slowing down our work, quite the contrary. We're working at full speed and we.

Konstantin Gisler (21:01)

Are committed to fully enforcing the DSA.

James Kanter (21:04)

As we go forward. Thank you very much. But that did not exactly.

Christel Schaldemosa (21:09)

I was not convinced, honestly, no, because I think it lasts too long. And we're talking about companies in a digital world. So in order to protect citizens, democracy, users, companies using these platforms, we need to speed up the process.

James Kanter (21:25)

Now, can I ask you, as the architect of the DSA or one of the architects of the dsa, what is your view on when online activity has gone from acceptable to a threat to democracy? When is there this systemic risk? Is it only when something nasty and fake gets amplified over and over again by the recommendation systems used by the likes of X and Meta? And to that point, do you think that X was doing this amplification? In the case of his conversation on X with Alice Vidal of the far right AfD party before the election in Germany in February, where it won nearly 21% of the vote?

Christel Schaldemosa (22:10)

Honestly, it's really difficult to say precisely where it goes from just being an individual or a couple of meetings or things and over to a more systemic risk. But I try to put it like this. You know, the fact that Musk interviewed the leader of RD in itself is not a systemic risk, not at all. But if he uses his algorithms and recommender systems in a way where AFD is getting a more prominent position and others that are against AfD is downgraded from X and it is not visible and it is not seen and it is not argued, then I think we are moving into a systemic risk. Or when it comes to TikTok, is not doing enough to protect an election in Romania, for instance, from foreign interference and these kind of, you know, anonymous accounts, etc.

EU Scream Host (23:07)

To Romania, where the Constitutional Court has annulled the results of last month's presidential elections.

James Kanter (23:13)

Romania, a country that's been vital to Ukraine's efforts against Russia and also hosts U.S. troops. The effort was largely run on TikTok. On November 5, Georgescu polled under 1%. Three weeks later, he won the first round with 23%. Romania's government says that victory was thanks to foreign influence.

Christel Schaldemosa (23:36)

Since there is a systemic risk there, they also have to act. It's difficult to say precisely where the line goes, but when it becomes more systematic and when it becomes clear that some parties might be amplified much more than others and some are even suppressed, then I think we're moving into an area where we have a systemic risk. And I hope that that is visible when the commission looks into it. And if that's the case, they should definitely act on it.

James Kanter (24:05)

Indeed, because they are looking at this event where Elon Musk was talking to Alice Vidal of the AfD. And just to be clear, when a systemic risk is detected, this triggers what.

Christel Schaldemosa (24:20)

Exactly under the dsa, an obligation to risk mitigate.

James Kanter (24:25)

So we are not an immediate obligation.

Christel Schaldemosa (24:27)

An immediate obligation. Once it's detected in the dsa, we have specifically not written down what kind of actions that could be a risk mitigating action, but they have to risk mitigate. So in the case of X, for instance, a risk mitigation measure could be making sure that other parties would be having the same treatment as rfd, that it is more transparent what they're doing and that they might even downgrade RFD so that it's on the same level as other parties. Thing is that we have left this to the EU Commission to look into and find when a systemic risk is in place and also to make sure that they are risk mitigating.

James Kanter (25:10)

And we've already had the election.

Christel Schaldemosa (25:11)

And we already have had the election.

James Kanter (25:12)

We've had the election and there was no stepping in.

Christel Schaldemosa (25:17)

But at the time when we made this system, made this architecture, we thought that that was the best way to make sure that we did not compromise democracy or compromise freedom of speech. Because at that time the fear was not at all mosque or United States or maybe to a certain extent Russia, of course, but, but more, you know, internal threats like countries in EU where you could be afraid of the state of play when it comes to democracy. For instance Hungary, we wanted to make sure that they didn't close down critical voices of Hungary or Poland, but, but Russia today it is United States or some of the owners of the platforms that we can see are acting in a way that could lead to systemic risk.

James Kanter (26:03)

You're also the coordinator on the European Parliament Special Committee on a European Democracy Shield. And this links to what we were talking about because it's broadly about bolstering EU resilience against foreign backed disinformation campaigns. The initiative would draw on EU resources to strengthen media literacy, promote Civic engagement and the rule of law and support independent journalism, which is good news. But such a shield, should it also have an offensive and not merely defensive role in foreign manipulation of information and interference? I mean, how far should this shield go?

Christel Schaldemosa (26:43)

That's a very, very good question, honestly, and I can't give you the answer right now, but we are looking into it because, I mean, things are changing. When we made the dsa, it was more internal threats, you know, from the government of Hungary, kind of had an impact on our discussions and we wanted to make sure that no one was silenced. Today, it is truly a question of foreign interference in its many forms. And in the past when we talked about foreign interference, it was Russia and China, but now it might even be from the United States.

James Kanter (27:16)

Massive technology companies who are behaving like rogue state actors.

Christel Schaldemosa (27:20)

Exactly. And that's why we really have to consider what's the best action. And all the questions, the things you mentioned here, civil society, media literacy, etc, it is things that we cannot make work overnight. It is, you know, something that we have to build up. I think that we need to make sure that we also have tools in place that can make us act faster. For instance, if we see something a few weeks before an election, we need to have something in place that can protect these countries from foreign interference. Can I give you one example, one very interesting example, for instance, and I'm not saying that this should be put in place, but in Greenland they had election 11 March, and weeks after that election, they have rules in place where they don't make any opinion polls, for instance, and you're not allowed to accept funds from abroad, for instance. Maybe we would have to look into these kind of things. And I think that could be very helpful maybe to protect the real dialogue in a country ahead of an election, foreign interference when it comes to funds. But maybe also not have too many opinion polls because you don't know how that works. And maybe, you know, you could even consider. I'm not saying that that's the best solution, but you could even consider closing down social media three weeks before an election. I mean, ultimately, I'm not saying that's the best idea because I don't want to close down people's, you know, the platforms where people talk. But if they're not working in a good manner, that could also be a tool. So we have to really look into the toolbox and to see what can we truly do in a way that can protect us against the threats coming from abroad.

James Kanter (29:02)

And that idea even of shutting down social media, it sort of takes us a little bit from a defensive stance.

EU Scream Host (29:09)

To at least a bit more of.

James Kanter (29:11)

An offensive stance, a bit more of a proactive stance. So even if we're not actively doing the same thing in other countries, media by spreading misinformation, I mean, that's a job for spies. At least we are not in a defensive posture. We are thereby in a more offensive one. And I think that's what you're saying.

Christel Schaldemosa (29:30)

And especially I'm really worried about. I mean, I don't know how it is in all the EU member states. That's also what we have to look into in this democracy Shield committee. But in my country, we know that young people, they are primarily getting their news from social media. So people in my age, probably people from plus 40, they are still reading newspapers and looking at television stations using public service media. But the young people are not. And so therefore they are even more exposed to the disinformation and misinformation campaigns. So we really have to be much more aware that there is a huge risk for our democracy.

James Kanter (30:09)

Just to the point about the democracy shield and to more of an offensive posture, I mean, there is a growing conversation about whether shielding Europe does imply altogether phasing out reliance on US technology almost as a security matter.

Christel Schaldemosa (30:27)

Yes. In the past few years ago, we spoke very much about Huawei and 5G and that we should be very cautious about buying Chinese. Today we're talking about American technology and we are so dependent on American digital infrastructure. So we simply have to step up in Europe. And in my opinion, we need to start that work now. It will last maybe five or 10 years before we can be more independent. But you know, even, and I'm not saying that Microsoft is a problem, but you know, from the Office package to AI to Google and, and of course the platforms, in so many ways we are deeply dependent. And then we have this American president who I saw last week saying something about, you know, developing this new F47 fighter jet. Fighter jet. They only wanted to sell a version to allies that were 10% less good as the one they used in United States because who knows if we have them as allies in the future kind of things. He said, well, that's also why when he look at us in that way, we will have to look the other way around. We cannot be sure that we have the United States as an ally in the future. We need to be more independent.

James Kanter (31:48)

And on the technology front, the Americans are offering us degraded technology.

Christel Schaldemosa (31:52)

Exactly.

James Kanter (31:53)

So, you know, that makes us even more Subaltern to American.

Christel Schaldemosa (31:56)

Exactly, exactly.

James Kanter (31:57)

American products.

Christel Schaldemosa (31:58)

And when we are trying to say that we have to be better, our competitiveness needs to be stronger, then it is even seen as anti American. It's about companies in Europe and their ability to be on the global market. Truly we are in a new global situation, a new security situation.

James Kanter (32:19)

Trump issued the White House memo on quotes defending American companies and innovators from overseas, extortion and unfair fines and penalties. And he did this the week before your visit to Washington. The message in the memo to the EU was don't even think about penalizing US companies for their content online. You know, to me, I think to a few other observers this looked like the first stage in banning US companies from complying with EU laws.

Christel Schaldemosa (32:49)

It was mentioned, but it's, I mean we tried to really let them know that we are not anti American, but we are pro fair competition. And no matter whether you're an eu, Chinese or American company, if you want to extend your services to European citizens, you need to comply with some rules. But it is is exactly the threat we are seeing from the United States right now. Because if he take it literally, you know, it would be impossible for Meta and X to comply with EU rules without compromising American rules, which is weird. But honestly, it is a scary message that Trump sent and if he is going to take it literally, we will have to fight back.

EU Scream Host (33:43)

As Kristal suggests. Few people imagine that allies like the United States, let alone one immensely rich and misguided man like Elon Musk, could become the sources of so much mischief online and in our democracies. Those developments may be an even more immediate concern for Sandra Gozzi. The liberal lawmaker is a former member of the Italian and French governments and as an Italian, he pays close attention to the relationship between Elon Musk and his country's far right prime minister, Giorgio Meloni, and to the effect that relationship has on Europe's ability to enforce its digital laws. Sandro talks first about his impressions of the trip to Washington and in particular that visit the delegation paid on MAGA hardliner Jim Jordan.

Sandro Gozzi (34:36)

We met a lot of people and I would say that the meetings were very useful. That doesn't mean that we are positive, very useful to understand each other and to understand that we largely disagree each other. Of course we came back to Brussels pretty worried about what is happening in Washington and what they the Americans would like in our continent.

James Kanter (34:58)

What did you hear in the meeting with Jim Jordan? I mean, was he outright critical? Did he use his usual narrative about freedom of speech as they see it.

Sandro Gozzi (35:09)

The meeting, as I said, was useful, was very long. We stayed there more than one hour. And it is clear that Jim Jordan considers as most of this administration, the digital service act as a blatant attack to the freedom of expression. We explained that this is totally wrong. On the contrary, our laws wants to keep pluralism on the social media in the platform that freedom of speech is not freedom of reach everybody with any content, violent, harmful, aggressive and that we are also concerned about foreign interferences in our democracies and that. And on that beat Jim Jordan replied that there is no such a thing like foreign interference. That also in 2016 in the US it was said that there had been foreign interference, but this is all wrong or false. So basically, I mean, when someone, I mean obviously denied the obvious that there are foreign interference from many countries, it is certainly difficult to.

James Kanter (36:22)

Let's look too though at some of the Europeans who were with you. I mean, I understand that some members of the European Parliament from your group actually were kind of nodding in agreement. Right. When among others who were in this meeting with Jim Jordan and I would note that Czech MEP Clara Dosta Lova of the Orban Aligned Patriots and Piotr Muller of the Polish Ultra Conservative Law and Justice Party were also with you there in Washing.

Sandro Gozzi (36:52)

Yeah, yeah, they were. And I would say that yes, the beginning the Declaration of Principles where yeah, I mean this legislation is not efficient, illustrative, etc. But then meeting after meeting, the argument weakened a lot, especially when the most of American firms clearly say but we want your legislation. Your legislation is good. Your legislation is against this oligopolistic control by the big tech. So I mean, I think that at the end of the day, also at the end of the mission, not at the day, at the end of the week also their positions moose a little bit.

James Kanter (37:33)

Sandro, how varied are the views, especially on enforcing the DSA across EU capitals, including the two that you know best, which are Rome and Paris?

Sandro Gozzi (37:45)

Well, I mean on the digital service sector, politically, let's start from the political perspective. There is a clear embarrassment of Fratelli d' Italia of the party, of Giorgia Meloni of ICR or the European Conservative.

James Kanter (38:01)

Group, which she was the head of for a long time and is her political family and is kind of the acceptable far right, if we can put.

Sandro Gozzi (38:09)

It that way, that ask to sort of underline to me that far right is totally unacceptable.

James Kanter (38:14)

This is how they are marketed. But there is very little space between them and the patriots and the sovereignty.

Sandro Gozzi (38:20)

There is no difference between ECR and patriots. And there is less, less difference between ECR patriots and the sovereigns of alternative Deutschland. On the sa, they are European conservative group embarrassed because they voted in favor. And now as their best buddies voted against Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, Vitor Orban, they say, well, I mean, DSA was good to protect minors, but on the rest we voted in favor because we wanted to protect minors. But all the rest why?

James Kanter (38:52)

Wanted to protect kids. Minors, kids.

Sandro Gozzi (38:55)

But it is clear that they are embarrassed because they want to follow now the new line of their new masters, which is called Elon Musk. And they would like to weaken or to even block the implementation of our law, which is strange for a sovereignist, because a sovereignist should be very jealous of its own legislation. Whereas the sovereignists take instruction outside Europe, across the Atlantic about our law, which is pretty peculiar concept of sovereignty and autonomy.

James Kanter (39:33)

Just a bit more on Meloni. In recent months, she's been to Mar A Lago and there have been these guys get a room moments with Elon Musk last year. Elon Musk has rather weirdly, rather creepily called Meloni more beautiful on the inside than she is on the outside. Meloni returned the compliment, saying that Musk has a precious genius. Is this an unbreakable relationship with Elon Musk or is this something that is expendable?

Sandro Gozzi (40:01)

Well, I mean, she's a big opportunistic opportunist and she's very shrewd in communication. She, her nature, ideological positioning. Because she's very ideological. She's very ideological. It is to be Trumpist. I mean, she wants to be with Trump. She wants to be with Mask. She think that gender issue is a bad thing. She think that we should restrict the right of abortion. She is very tough and she's got a xenophobic attitude toward the migrants. She's got a very nationalistic idea of the nation. When Mellon speak about the nation, it's the opposite of when Emmanuel Macron speak about the nation. The nation of Mellon is white, Christian, Italian for seven generations, not adherence to the republican values. So I mean, this is Meloni. And so I mean, of course Meloni would like to be on Trump's side and would like to be seen, I repeat, as the sort of ambassador for Trump in Europe. But, but, but the best way to protect the national interest, the economic interest, is to take side with the European, with the Germany, with France, with Poland, with Spain. So this is why now she's in trouble. She's very shy. She, she doesn't take clear position. She's very ambiguous on Ukraine. Why she's all of a su as being. She has become so ambiguous of Ukraine because her stances on Ukraine were not based on strong values and belief. She simply needed to be accredited in Washington. And so she did what Joe Biden wanted her to do. Now. Now of course she's changing aside because Donald Trump has a totally different attitude towards Ukraine. And so also Giorgia Meloni change her side. Why? I insist on this because too many of my colleague and your colleague and not only Rome wanted absolutely to believe she's not that dangerous. After all, she's pro European. This is all, sorry to say it, bullshit.

James Kanter (42:06)

We really sane washed, whitewashed and mainstream washed Georgia brainwashed. Well, we were, we were brainwashed and then we mainstream washed her. More seriously, let me put it this way. One complication for Europe in getting into a more into getting into more tensions with the Americans by let's say, ruling against X and Meta through the Digital Services Act. One big complication is the degree to which Europe and its ally Ukraine have become so dependent on US technology. And when it comes to Elon Musk and his thousands of low orbit satellites, this is Starlink that provides communications, including on the battlefield in Ukraine. And it's something that Giorgio Meloni was negotiating for to run military and diplomatic communications for Italy as well as this was going to be a five year deal worth 1.5 billion euros. Though those negotiations are apparently on hold for now. And on the other hand, there are those like Polish Foreign Minister Radislaw Sikorski who have voiced concerns about using Starlink as a liability for Europe and especially for Ukraine. Musk then rudely slams Sikorsky in March. He tells him, Musk tells Sikorsky, be quiet, small man. And Musk also says there is no substitute for Starlink. I mean, Sandro, anything to do with Europe and Musk seems to lead to huge blowups. And to what degree do you think that this, these blowups, these kind of temper tantrums by Elon Musk is part of why the European Commission is so slow in enforcing the Digital Services Act.

Sandro Gozzi (43:44)

So it is clear that Giorgia Meloni, she was engaged in a conversation with Elon Musk on Starlink. Then most of the system in Italy, I mean, pushed again this crazy choice of putting the end of Elon Musk such a sensitive strategic infrastructure. I hope that your fear is not confirmed. I hope that the European Commission only is taking time because it is clear that that would be the first time Claim that some sanctions on a procedure is launched and the sanctions are adopted against a big digital platform, seeing the DSA enter into force. And it is clear that there is always the risk that ICSA bring an action to the Court of Justice that the Commission needs to be legally solid.

James Kanter (44:34)

And they don't want to lose their.

Sandro Gozzi (44:36)

First case and they don't want to leave their first case. And this I understand very well. This is understandable.

James Kanter (44:41)

But.

Sandro Gozzi (44:42)

But I hope, because as European Parliament, we never accept that the European Commission is ready to put in the same basket tariffs, VAT trade relationship and implementation of our legislation.

James Kanter (44:59)

Implementation of legislation that is supposed to be about protecting the future of our democracies.

Sandro Gozzi (45:04)

Exactly. That cannot be negotiated. It is non negotiable. And it is non negotiable because democratically, after three years and half of work consulting the civil society, consulting the big tech, small tech startups, after long debate between the Council and the Parliament, we have adopted our legislation.

James Kanter (45:25)

So the former European Commissioner, Thierry Breton, the Frenchman, who's aligned with your liberal group and the European Parliament, part of that family, if you like, he was effectively forced out of his job last year. And this happened after he started the probes into Elon Musk's X platform and after he issued warnings to Musk about using the platform to support all kinds of far right politicians activities, notably in the UK at that point. Musk at one point responds to Breton with a meme from the movie Tropic Thunder saying take a big step back and literally go fuck your face. Here's something I've always wanted to say on TV f your own face. That was Elon Musk's response to European.

EU Scream Host (46:13)

Union digital enforcer Terry Breton's warning before Musk's interview with Donald Trump on Monday.

James Kanter (46:19)

Basically, Breton had become known as somebody who would not bend the knee in the face of big tech excesses. And he was also in line for a bigger job. This is Breton. He was in line for a bigger job in the current European Commission, but Breton was defenestrated. He was thrown out of the window, apparently by European Commission President Von Lyon in cooperation with Paris Sandro. This ouster of Breton, to me, to other observers, it's sort of like part of a global tech coup, right? You know, where Elon Musk, because he's already seen as so rich, so powerful, is even to some degree calling the shots in Europe. I mean, I would also add that there is this idea that it was Jim Jordan even back then, who was telling the Europeans, get rid of this guy.

Sandro Gozzi (47:08)

Well, I mean, I don't know what are the real reasons that brought the decision not to confirm Thierry Breton. So I cannot dwell about that. Certainly Thierry Breton has done a terrific job in the European Commission. I worked very closely with him as lawmakers. He has been rightly pushy, you know.

James Kanter (47:26)

Just on that point. It's amazing how so many commentators within the commission who are in, let's say EU functionnaire positions, civil service positions are like, no, he went too fast, he didn't follow the process us so exactly. I mean we are talking about some very serious time dependent issues here about the future of our politics. So, you know, I think it stands to reason that Breton in that case, even if he maybe acted quite quickly, had reasons to.

Sandro Gozzi (47:55)

Yeah, I mean I think that in mid August he couldn't, he was the only one in Brussels by the way, and he couldn't organize a meeting of the College of the Commissioners.

Thierry Breton (48:03)

Breton reminded musk of the EU's rules on promoting hate speech in the letter. And so if you missed it, the. The main thing I think the EU is upset about is during a lot of the riots that were going on across the uk, Musk posted a fake Telegraph article onto X, or rather reposted one, and he pointed out that they mentioned detainment camps in it. The headline was Keir Starmer considering building emergency detainment camps. This is not a piece that the Telegraph ran nor something Keir Starmer said or has done.

Sandro Gozzi (48:35)

I think that he was right in sending that letter because after all, most of the public, a good chunk of the public fix is in Europe. So it was clear that, I mean everything happens must be in compliance with the roles in Europe. And that was he recalled in that letter. Nothing less, nothing more. There was no threatened, there was no interference. I regret that Yari Berton, I mean, couldn't continue his job. And I think it remains a personality which by its experience, this coverage will continue to play a role in the European puppet debate.

James Kanter (49:13)

At a European Parliament hearing in March. Sandro, you expressed alarm about Meta's apparent lack of moderation in languages other than English.

Sandro Gozzi (49:24)

This is concerned as very serious. We organized hearing of representative of civil society. There was fact review and they really outlighted the low amount of moderators, e.g. of meta, meta for languages different to English compared to the user population. And also they say that Meta's automated moderation fails to detect a majority of political advertisements. So there are posts on Facebook which are political advertise, but the consumer do not know that it is political advertisement.

Claire Melford (49:59)

And for many languages, we found that meta reports hiring only dozens of moderators for the totality of their work. There is no separate reporting for ad moderators. And when excluding international languages, we found like 160,000 users per moderator on average. And it's especially concerning that less prominent countries generally report even lower figures. So, for example, in Greece, we only have 30 moderators for 6.4 million users.

Sandro Gozzi (50:30)

And then also, I mean, the global Disinformation Index clearly told us that today the business model of the platform has not changed.

James Kanter (50:40)

Yeah, and this was the intervention of.

Konstantin Gisler (50:42)

Claire Melford since 2012, when Facebook pioneered the engagement driven algorithm. The more enraging the content, the more likely it is to get promoted and the more likely the content creator is to earn ad revenue alongside the social media company. This enragement equals engagement equals ad revenue. Formula has normalized.

Sandro Gozzi (51:06)

The extreme enragement is equal more virality. Enragement, engagement, virality, more money. This is what we have to fight against.

Konstantin Gisler (51:18)

The good news is we in Europe have the weapons in our arsenal to stop this. We have the regulations encoded within the DSA and its associated codes of conduct which can break the weaponization of engagement driven algorithms by hostile foreign powers and profiteers. The tech companies have to comply and the European Commission has to enforce. Just as the Russian kinetic war is escalating on the front in Ukraine, the information war is also accelerating.

James Kanter (51:47)

Also at this hearing in March is where we saw Konstantin Gisler, the Director general of the tech lobby group.Europe, a group that has X and Meta and many others as members. And he was complaining about the extra work that the DSA has created.

Konstantin Gisler (52:06)

Very large online platforms had to comply with the DDSA in just four months. The first transparency reports were due three months later. That is unprecedented to my knowledge, in new regulation.

James Kanter (52:17)

And I was sort of astonished. I mean, this fellow represents what are some of the richest companies in the world. And these companies, I was sort of saying to myself, these companies can't hire another law firm, another consultant, another clerk to handle, you know, something that is about the preservation of our democracies, protection of children and so on and so forth. But I have to add, Mr. Gistler then tries to make a joke saying the European Parliament took more time to sign off on a food and beverage deal for its canteen than the European Commission took to make its first moves with the dsa.

Konstantin Gisler (52:53)

To put that a little bit into perspective, that's shorter than the time it took the European Parliament's administration to do the procurement process for new canteen and restaurant Service caterer. Now I'm not saying that for the comical effect, but I think also to make a serious point here.

James Kanter (53:09)

Ha ha ha. I don't know how you feel about this, but to me this is kind of Konstantin Gisler going doge there. I'm referring to Elon Musk's anti bureaucracy department in the United States leveraging the idea that all state bureaucracy is a problem when in fact. But the underlying goal is sort of about promoting big tech. He was almost minimizing what the European Commission was undertaking to do with the Digital Services act and drawing a parallel with the Horeca industry with food and beverage.

Sandro Gozzi (53:43)

No, it is clear that they pretended all the big tech, a few big tech, they pretended to agree with our approach in the previous. We had a dialogue with them. They presented their cases, they presented their contribution, their arguments, their technical advices. They pretended. But of course they would like to be totally free. They don't want the rules, they don't want the principle and they want transparent the algorithm. They don't want to reduce violent content because it is their business model. And now they have seen a golden opportunity to block what they could not block before with Donald Trump administration and Elon Musk role. That is what they are doing. So I mean now they go cocky and they say, well, I mean they will never do so. The Europeans do not have the guts to move ahead. And I think that we shouldn't give in to these provocations. We do not have to overreact. We have to stay firm and firmly implement our legislation. And this is the point and this is the issue on which we have to insist with the Commission don't put in the same basket a trade negotiation which is absolutely necessary, a defense approach which is absolutely vital. And the digital legislation which you must to implement because we are a democracy, we are a democratic construction and we have adopted our laws. And the funny lawyers who make joke it will be will get fun. If you want wants to bring an action before the Court of Justice if he doesn't like our legislation and the way it is implemented. But this is why we have to put pressure, increasing pressure on the European Commission.

James Kanter (55:34)

That's it for this episode.

EU Scream Host (55:36)

But one more thing before you go. There's an easy way to become a material supporter of EU Scream. It's simple. You look for EU Scream@patreon.com and you pledge what you can. Now, EU Scream is non profit journalism. We might occasionally do partnerships and take advertising. And we're grateful to Full Beam Media for an annual grant but here's the.

James Kanter (56:01)

We need your support to bring you.

EU Scream Host (56:03)

More content more regularly. It's your support that helps us delve.

James Kanter (56:07)

Into this new, darker era in our.

EU Scream Host (56:09)

Politics, into how the EU should be responding, and into the thoughts and experience of people who really know what they're talking about. Small donations to large ones, it's all incredibly appreciated. It also helps when we get a five star rating at Spotify or a review at Apple. Podcasts and passing on episodes to family, colleagues, friends. That's another great way to show support. For more details and for more EU screens, do please visit EU scream.com Thanks for listening.