Since the entry into force of the Digital Services Act (DSA) in 2024, Europe has adopted a digital regulatory tool presented as a weapon against disinformation and illicit content. But behind this speech, the DSA reveals itself to be a real tool of information control, imposing proactive censorship and an ideological framework that threatens freedom of expression.
End of fact-checking in the United States, strengthening of the DSA in Europe
Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, recently ended its fact-checking program in the United States, accused of political bias and censorship. This turnaround, announced by Mark Zuckerberg, is part of a desire to refocus its platforms on freedom of expression. However, this change does not apply to Europe, where the DSA imposes strict obligations on digital platforms. The latter must actively fight against “fake news” and content deemed illicit, under penalty of heavy sanctions of up to 6% of their annual turnover.
French Digital Minister Clara Chappaz confirmed that Meta would comply with DSA requirements in Europe, despite the end of fact-checking in the United States. This situation highlights the striking contrast between the two continents: while the United States seems to be moving towards greater freedom of expression, Europe is strengthening its control over content distributed online.
A tool of censorship in disguise
The DSA presents itself as a necessary response to the challenges posed by hate speech and disinformation. However, its concrete applications reveal a desire to control the public narrative. Large platforms like Meta or Google must now ensure that published content complies with the “standards” established by European institutions. This proactive censorship is exercised in particular via tools like NewsGuard, a private company which evaluates news sites based on criteria that are often subjective and aligned with the interests of the establishment.
NewsGuard, widely used by advertisers and governments, assigns “credibility” ratings to news outlets. Sites deemed non-compliant with the company’s ideological standards are penalized financially, their advertising revenue being reduced by automated devaluation mechanisms. This approach mainly targets independent and conservative media, thus reinforcing an ideological monopoly on information.
A threat to media diversity
The NewsGuard model perfectly illustrates the excesses of the DSA. Under the guise of fighting disinformation, tools like this impose an ideological filter that marginalizes dissenting voices. For example, sites critical of containment policies linked to COVID-19, or even media skeptical of climate initiatives, are systematically penalized.
At the same time, organizations like the AFP are paid to provide “fact-checks” aligned with progressive standards. This practice, far from being neutral, helps guide public debate while restricting access to divergent opinions. Thus, the DSA acts as a “ministry of truth”, forcing platforms and media to adopt a single narrative under penalty of sanctions.
-The impact on freedom of expression
The consequences of these policies on freedom of expression are alarming. By imposing financial penalties and marginalizing independent media, the DSA limits the plurality of opinions and restricts democratic debate. European citizens, although theoretically protected by fundamental rights, find themselves confronted with increasingly filtered and biased information.
Europe thus seems to be locked into a model of digital control where platforms are no longer spaces for free expression, but tools for ideological regulation. Unlike the United States, where freedom of expression is protected by the First Amendment, the old continent imposes a restrictive framework that threatens the very foundations of democracy.
The Digital Services Act, presented as progress in the fight against online abuse, turns out to be an instrument of censorship and ideological control. While the United States is beginning a return to fundamental principles of freedom of expression, Europe is sinking into an authoritarian logic that limits public debate and homogenizes opinions.
In this context, it is urgent to question the real impact of the DSA on European society. Information, the pillar of any democracy, cannot be left in the hands of institutions and private actors who favor a single narrative. European citizens deserve better than state control disguised under progressive trappings. They deserve true freedom of information and expression, without ideological hindrance.
Photo credit: DR
[cc] Breizh-info.com2025, dispatches free to copy and distribute subject to mention and link to the original source
