[jongjong]

The EU government doesn't give a crap about unfair social media algorithms when they benefit their authoritarian agendas (at the expense of citizens) but as soon as soon as the algorithms go against their own agenda, they immediately launch a commission! And, ironically, the algorithms today are less constrained than they've ever been.

[red_trumpet]

You realize that the European Commission[1,2] is a big part of the executive branch of the EU, yeah? (The other one being the european council). So if there is something as an "EU government", it is the commission.

[1] https://commission.europa.eu/index_en [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

[z7]

The European Commission is not elected by EU citizens btw.

[red_trumpet]

I know. The same holds true for the German government.

[RandomLensman]

What authoritarian agenda? What commission?

[SiempreViernes]

Maybe they saw something on youtube that said Von Der Leyen is going to the ISS? That's about the only way I can see "EU launches comission" make any sense. ;)

[jongjong]

For example, they were happy about social media platforms censoring or otherwise suppressing content which opposed the COVID19 vaccine mandates; they didn't raise any alarms there while there was actual substantial manipulation of the algorithms involved...

But now that X has mostly removed filtering and manipulations from the algorithms, they begin proceedings against it! Just because they don't like the kind of content that people posted. They don't want people to have equal voice.

[RandomLensman]

Not sure what the issue is? European countries not being allowed to have their own culture around speech (which rolls up into the EU to some extent)?

[jongjong]

I don't think it's the job of EU government to manipulate the algorithms to suit their values. Their job is the opposite of that; to ensure that the algorithms operate with as little manipulation as possible so that every individual has equal voice/reach on these platforms (at least equal on a per-follower basis) with as little manipulation as possible.

As someone who didn't have much prejudice about the current Israel/Palestine situation, I appreciated seeing both sides; it allowed me to come to the conclusion that both sides fall short of my own moral values and therefore I don't need to involve myself in debates about the lesser or two evils.

Maybe other people with different morals than myself felt that one side met their 'good guy' threshold and wants to support them. They're free to voice their support, but I'd like to keep my taxpayer money in my own country where it can support people whose morals more closely align with my own.

[RandomLensman]

The EU as well as nation states have laws to uphold and policy/social objectives that might require that. The way to change that is to change laws, customs, and objectives. You are welcome to push down that route, of course.

[gwervc]

> You are welcome to push down that route, of course.

Of course not, precisely because public speech including on media such as twitter is heavily censored.

The trick is gross but effective: treat ideas threatening to the system as illegal so they can be fought using the legal system instead of the political one. It's a power grab to silence Europeans. Same old trick used in China, Iran, any autocracy really.

[lispm]

> to ensure that the algorithms operate with as little manipulation as possible so that every individual has equal voice/reach on these platforms

The companies do that? In which alternate world do you live?

[exceptione]

Please realize that the anti-vaccine nonsense is content driven by hostile regimes, ie China and Russia.

I will give you some links:

- https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-ca...

- https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/foreign-disinformation-...

- https://www.politico.eu/article/antivax-conspiracy-lean-pro-...

[logicchains]

Who said anything about vaccines? Some European countries have been penalising people for entirely organic anti-immigration sentiments.

[exceptione]

I have never heard of people being "penalized". If you violate the law, for example by discriminating someone, you can get a penalty indeed.

You can have all your "anti-immigration sentiments", but you are not going to be penalized. You can be completely opposed against immigration, and if you have some good arguments, you can calmly post them anywhere. I fear that "sentiment" is doing a lot of work here.

Besides: what looks like organic in extremist circles is often not. You start with a business model and you will gather a herd. You just have to feed them.

[lispm]

European countries are under attack by the Russian regime, if you missed it. Immigration was and is used as a weapon to destabilize European countries. Russia was/is financing immigration hostile parties and organizations in Europe.

An example:

https://www.dw.com/en/poland-says-belarus-russia-behind-new-...

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2023/09/22/le-pen-s...

Because of the Russian war against the Ukraine, Europe currently hosts millions (> 4 million) of additional refugees.

[gwervc]

Exactly, "the effectiveness of measures taken to combat information manipulation" sure didn't seem to be an issue for decades for the UE commission when thr manipulation was done by a cell at Twitter itself, such as removing trending conversative hashtags or suspending right-wing EU politicians.

Of course now that the platform allows more balanced opinions, any power available will be used to silence (growing) opposition.