U.S. decries EU’s $140 million fine on X as an “attack on Americans” – NaturalNews.com

• The European Union has levied its first major fine under the Digital Services Act (DSA), imposing a €120 million penalty on the platform X for violations including a deceptive verification system and insufficient ad transparency.
• The United States government has reacted with strong condemnation, framing the fine as a politically motivated “attack on the American people” and an assault on American free speech and tech supremacy, rather than legitimate regulation.
• The conflict highlights a deep ideological divide: The EU prioritizes user safety and accountability through rules like the DSA, while the current U.S. administration champions minimal interference, viewing such mandates as government-backed censorship.
• The fine against X is seen as an escalation in a broader transatlantic battle over tech governance, with the U.S. accusing the EU of regulatory overreach aimed at handicapping successful American companies.
• The outcome sets a critical global precedent, forcing X to change its practices and signaling active DSA enforcement, while raising questions about potential U.S. retaliation and straining the broader geopolitical relationship.

In a dramatic escalation of the transatlantic battle over the future of the internet, the United States has accused the European Union of launching an “attack on the American people” following Brussels’ decision to levy a massive fine against Elon Musk’s social media platform, X. The European Commission announced the €120 million ($140 million) penalty on December 5, marking its first formal enforcement action under the bloc’s sweeping new Digital Services Act (DSA). This move has ignited a firestorm of protest from top U.S. officials, who frame the action not as regulatory compliance but as a politically motivated assault on American free speech and technological supremacy.

A landmark fine and a furious response

The fine stems from the EU’s investigation into X’s business practices. Regulators found violations of the DSA, centering on what the EU calls “deceptive design.” The Commission took issue with X’s revamped system for granting blue verification checkmarks, arguing that allowing users to pay for the badge without robust identity verification misleads users and opens them to impersonation scams. The EU also cited X for insufficient transparency in its online advertising library and for failing to provide adequate data access to researchers.

The reaction from Washington was swift and severe. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared the fine “an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” stating that “the days of censoring Americans online are over.” His sentiments were echoed by other high-profile figures. U.S. Vice President JD Vance asserted that the EU was punishing X for “not engaging in censorship,” while Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr accused Europe of “taxing Americans to subsidize a continent held back by its own suffocating regulations.”

The digital services act: Europe’s new rulebook

To understand the conflict, one must grasp the DSA. Enacted in 2022, this landmark law is designed to create a safer digital space. It imposes strict rules on the largest companies, dubbed “Very Large Online Platforms.” These rules mandate greater transparency around algorithms and advertising, require proactive measures to combat illegal content, and empower users. For Brussels, the DSA is a necessary check on the power of Big Tech.

However, from Washington, the law looks different. The current U.S. administration views the DSA as regulatory overreach that disproportionately targets successful American companies. They argue that Europe, lacking its own tech giants, is using regulation to handicap U.S. firms and extract financial penalties. This fine against X is seen as the latest salvo in a broader campaign.

The ideological fault line: Free speech vs. online safety

At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental ideological divide. The EU prioritizes a framework aimed at protecting citizens from online harms and enforcing strict rules. The bloc insists its rules apply equally to all firms and reflect European societal values.

The current U.S. administration champions a vision of minimal interference in online speech, framing any mandated content moderation as government-backed censorship. Officials have positioned themselves as defenders of the First Amendment against foreign encroachment. Elon Musk has fueled this narrative, previously claiming the EU offered X an “illegal secret deal” to censor speech quietly to avoid fines.

Historical context: From allies to adversaries in tech

This clash did not emerge overnight. The EU has long taken a more precautionary approach, from data protection to antitrust enforcement. The U.S., home to Silicon Valley, historically advocated for a lighter-touch, innovation-first model.

The gap has widened significantly. The passage of the DSA represents Europe’s most assertive attempt yet to dictate global digital rules. Concurrently, the U.S. political landscape has shifted, with the current administration adopting a technology policy that views foreign regulations as economic threats. A newly released U.S. national security strategy explicitly criticizes Europe’s focus on “regulatory suffocation.”

What the fine means for X and its users

For X, the penalty is more than a financial setback; it is a directive to change. The company must now demonstrate how it will bring its verification system, ad library and data access policies into compliance. Failure to do so could result in recurring periodic fines. For users in the EU, the outcome could mean a more transparent but potentially altered experience on the platform.

“An ideological divide is a deep-seated disagreement over fundamental beliefs and values, such as the role of government versus individual liberty,” said BrightU.AI‘s Enoch. “It often manifests in political conflicts, like regulatory battles, where one side may prioritize collective safety and intervention while the other champions free markets and personal autonomy. This chasm shapes policy, fuels partisan polarization and makes compromise difficult to achieve.”

The implications extend far beyond one social media company. This confrontation sets a critical precedent for how the world’s two major Western economic blocs will govern the digital sphere. Other American tech giants are watching closely, as the EU’s enforcement machinery is now demonstrably active. The U.S. administration faces a choice: how forcefully will it retaliate? Officials have already hinted at potential responses, with some lawmakers questioning the cost of continuing to guarantee European security through NATO while the EU targets American companies.

Free speech is under siege. Watch this video.

This video is from The HighWire with Del Bigtree channel on Brighteon.com.

Sources include: 

rt.com

bbc.com

techpolicypress.com

BrightU.ai

Brighteon.com