Given her expertise and track record, who wouldn’t immediately turn to former Senator, former Secretary of “We came, We saw, He died” State, and famous Bleach-Bit wunderkind, Hillary Clinton for advice on making the internet freer and more secure?
Without a hint of irony, ol’ “Hill from the Hill” determined April 21 that she should use what is (currently) one of the most restrictive, anti-liberty, anti-conservative social media sites, Twitter, to express support for an EU proposal that will take the Twitter attitude and mandate it – and more – across all the European Union member states.
For too long, tech platforms have amplified disinformation and extremism with no accountability. The EU is poised to do something about it. I urge our transatlantic allies to push the Digital Services Act across the finish line and bolster global democracy before it's too late.
For too long, tech platforms have amplified disinformation and extremism with no accountability. The EU is poised to do something about it.— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) April 21, 2022
I urge our transatlantic allies to push the Digital Services Act across the finish line and bolster global democracy before it's too late.
And she got her wish. On the 23rd, the EU Council announced:
An important step has been taken today with the provisional political agreement reached on the Digital Services Act (DSA) between the Council and the European Parliament.
In terms of ambition, the nature of the actors regulated and the innovative aspect of the supervision involved, the DSA is a world first in the field of digital regulation.
If you believe in freedom of speech and haven’t heard about the EU’s DSA, don’t get the wrong idea. Certainly, don’t question why a lifetime political authoritarian like Clinton would claim that having the European state define “disinformation” and “extremism” online is good for the internet or the globe.
Or, to use her verbiage, it’s “democratizing.”
And remember, Hillary’s love for the DSA is in NO WAY like the tyrannical claim that “democracy” is “self-government,” when it actually is plunder-and-control by majority vote. Much like French socialist Jean Jacques Rousseau, whose 18th Century idea that private property, a free press, and small government were offensive, and that the governing “Assembly” could determine all truth and act with universal infallibility, Hillary would like Europeans to, well… just follow the collectivist Brussels lead and shut the heck up.
Under its “Scope” section, the EU Council says:
The obligations introduced are proportionate to the nature of the services concerned and tailored to the number of users, meaning that very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs) will be subject to more stringent requirements. Services with more than 45 million monthly active users in the European Union will fall into the category of very large online platforms and very large search engines.
Remember, accept their terminology and their magic phrasing. They define the “proportions” and determine how “proportional” those proportions are. Don’t ever think that the very act of determining what is “proportional” is arbitrary and completely left up to authoritarians. Frogs should let their handlers handle the heat of the pot in which the handlers have placed them. It’s warm and cozy.
And, just like Hillary, the idea that someone should express an idea, or offer information that does not conform to the Ministry of Truth’s official narrative
The DSA introduces an obligation for very large digital platforms and services to analyse systemic risks they create and to carry out risk reduction analysis.
This analysis must be carried out every year and will enable continuous monitoring aimed at reducing risks associated with:
- dissemination of illegal content
- adverse effects on fundamental rights
- manipulation of services having an impact on democratic processes and public security
- adverse effects on gender-based violence, and on minors and serious consequences for the physical or mental health of users
And, of course, “illegal content,” content that is “adverse to fundamental rights” (wouldn’t speech policing be just that?) and the rest are defined by the state.
See, in the future EU, there is no need to show that someone actually lied about another person or his or her character.
There will be no need to restrict government to merely handling traditional slander or libel cases (which would better be handled privately, through arbitration that doesn’t force people to pay for the government courts). This is the EU of total speech control, blessed with the self-claimed power to define words and their intent.
Stay comfortable, frog.
And, sure to paint the power-grab as a way to “make things safe and fair,” the EU Council adds this about “Dark Patterns…”
For online platforms and interfaces covered by the DSA, the co-legislators have agreed to prohibit misleading interfaces known as ‘dark patterns’ and practices aimed at misleading users.
Sorry, Galileo, dissent will not be tolerated. If your ideas are “not part of our determined EU consensus” they are heretical. We define heretical content, and we call it “dark patterns.”
And Hillary digs that.
This might be attributable to her clear love of free speech (while Secretary of State in 2009, she joined the Obamaites and UN to praise Egypt in suppressing what it called “blasphemous speech”, and, of course, her loving hubby once insinuated that the Oklahoma City bombing was caused by conservative Talk Radio, as he engaged in an aborted attempt to reinstate the speech-crushing FCC “fairness doctrine” which has nothing to do with “fairness” at all).
Or it might be attributable to her anticipation of the due-in-the-fall EU “Digital Identity” that, if passed, will force onto all web users an access-ident-code that won’t be used in any way to police their speech, shut them down, connect their “level of goodness” to their online banking and freeze their accounts (a-la Justin Trudeau’s recent attacks on Canadian Freedom Convoy supporters), or misused by corporations or hackers.
Better yet, Hillary’s support for this EU tyranny might stem from her possible awareness that the BBC, Microsoft, Adobe, Sony, Intel, Truepic, Twitter and DARPA recently “finished a major event” in January that firmed-up their push for the anodyne sounding “C2PA.”
That wondrous “public-private partnership” (aka, economically fascist creation) has an official title of the “Coalition for Content Provenance and Authentication”, and as a Microsoft press release stated last year:
The formation of the C2PA brings together founding members of the Adobe-led Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI) and the Microsoft- and BBC-led Project Origin, unifying technical specifications under a single entity. The CAI is building a system to provide provenance and history for digital media, giving creators a tool to claim authorship and empowering consumers to evaluate whether what they are seeing is trustworthy. Project Origin has its roots in the production and distribution of news. The effort has focused on tackling disinformation in the digital news ecosystem by attaching signals to a piece of content to demonstrate its integrity and making this information available to those using it.
If that whispers “digital ID attached to your posts and content”, you might be hearing Hillary, close to your ear.
The point is that no political entity, in the US or the EU, should have any say in what opinions people post online.
The EU move, and Hillary’s support of it, are harbingers of a coming battle.