Reading time: 7 minutes
Investigation vindicates our long-running exposé of the incredible censorship apparatus build by EU institutions.
Statement from MCC Brussels on the US House Judiciary Committee Investigation into EU Censorship
Highlights:
- Unassailable evidence confirms our characterisation of the EU’s web of ‘online regulations’ as a censorship operating system
- Revelations expose the myth of ‘voluntary’ cooperation and the EU’s reliance on behind-closed-doors deals to censor speech
- Evidence of the extreme granularity of EU’s interference in online speech
- Senior EU officials implicated in direct attempts to invoke censorship
- EU increasingly interfering in national elections
- Media conspiracy of silence on these issues
The release of the interim staff report by the US House Judiciary Committee, titled The Foreign Censorship Threat, is a major moment for freedom of expression in Europe. For years, MCC Brussels has warned that the European Union is constructing a sophisticated, opaque, and authoritarian 'censorship operating system' designed to shield the EU elite from the electorate. Today, we stand vindicated. The explosive findings from Washington confirm, with granular and shocking detail, that the EU’s regime of narrative control is not merely a bureaucratic initiative but a calculated assault on democracy. It is a profound scandal that European citizens must rely on investigators in the United States Congress to uncover the truth about how their own rights are being eroded. The European Commission has systematically frustrated attempts at transparency, operating behind closed doors to construct what we have termed an unholy alliance of unaccountable organisations.
EU’s censorship operating system exposed
The release of internal communications from major technology platforms provides incontrovertible proof that the European Union’s regulatory framework is a ‘censorship operating system’ designed to systematically throttle free speech. For years, MCC Brussels has warned that this system functions as an ‘unholy alliance’ between unelected EU institutions, Big Tech, and a network of unaccountable, state-funded NGOs. This assessment is now vindicated by internal documents showing that technology companies felt they “didn’t really have a choice” but to comply with the European Commission's demands, which included altering global community guidelines to censor lawful political debate on issues like migration and gender and directly intervening in elections.. The documents expose the EU’s primary objective of shielding its own power and policies from the unpredictability of the popular will.
The Myth of ‘Voluntary’ Cooperation
The House Judiciary Committee’s release of internal communications from major technology platforms dismantles the EU’s primary defence: that its ‘Codes of Practice’ are voluntary. MCC Brussels has long argued that these codes were a “Trojan Horse” for legally binding censorship. The US investigation proves this beyond doubt. Internal emails from Google and other tech giants reveal that platforms felt they “don’t really have a choice” but to comply with the Commission's demands. Moreover, the Commission has been deeply involved in the management and steering of so-called voluntary bodies. As one file reveals, the agenda of these forums is set “under (strong) impetus from the EU Commission; decision is taken by ‘consensus’ - but consensus can be heavily pressed by the EC if they disagree with where it's going.” This confirms our analysis that the EU has established an extra-legal system where unelected bureaucrats dictate the boundaries of permissible speech without democratic oversight.
Shocking Granularity of Interference
The degree of interference revealed is chilling. This is not high-level regulation; it is approaching a minute-by-minute policing of political debate. For example, the investigation exposes that the EU Internet Forum (EUIF) – another ‘voluntary’ forum – expanded its scope from counter-terrorism to targeting “political satire,” “populist rhetoric,” and “meme subculture.” As we have documented, the EU views “ridicule” and “insults” as attacks on democracy that must be criminalized. The US findings show that platforms were instructed to censor anti-establishment and anti-EU content. This is the operationalization of the EU's fear of open and unpredictable debate. The target is not illegal content, but the ‘wrong’ political opinions.
Top EU officials directly implicated
The interference comes from the very top of EU institutions. The investigation implicates President Ursula von der Leyen and former Vice President Věra Jourová directly. Documents show Jourová pressured platforms to change content rules regarding COVID-19 and vaccines, targeting even satire. Furthermore, the revelation that European officials flew to California to discuss censorship of US elections demonstrates that the EU’s ambition is global. This confirms a trend we have highlighted of senior officials directly intervening in political debates and targeting platforms, like former Commissioner Thierry Breton who threatened X for hosting a political interview. These officials act with the arrogance of those who believe they are above the law.
Systematic Election Interference
Most damning is the evidence that the Commission’s goal is not merely to ‘control the narrative’ generally, but to intervene directly in democratic elections. The House GOP report identifies interference in at least eight elections across six nations since 2023.
Two cases highlight the severity of this threat:
- Slovakia: The US investigation reveals that, under EU pressure, TikTok censored standard political claims about transgender issues—such as "there are only two genders"—classifying them as hate speech ahead of the 2023 parliamentary elections. This confirms our reporting that the EU is using ‘hate speech’ laws to enforce a specific ideological worldview.
- Romania: MCC Brussels recently highlighted the annulment of the 2024 Romanian presidential election as a live experiment in social and political manipulation. The Romanian authorities justified this annulment based on intelligence allegations of a Russian-backed TikTok bot campaign. However, the House Judiciary Committee has released a document in which TikTok explicitly informed the European Commission that it found “no evidence” of such a coordinated network. Despite this, the election was annulled. This confirms our analysis that the Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI) narrative is a ruse used to delegitimize dissent. The EU knew the premise for the annulment was false, yet the “machinery of ‘resilience’ was activated to correct” the wrong result.
The Media’s Conspiracy of Silence
Perhaps as disturbing as the findings themselves is the silence of the European mainstream media. There has been a conspiracy of silence regarding the construction of this censorship apparatus. Mainstream outlets have largely accepted the EU's framing of ‘disinformation’ without question, barely going beyond the press releases of the EU to understand why and how the EU is systematically interfering in online speech. This casts serious doubt on the media’s desire to genuinely hold power to account: some of the most powerful and least democratic institutions in Europe have been given a blank check to determine the limits of permissible discourse, pre-emptively censor information, and intervene in elections.
Conclusion
The House Judiciary Committee has handed the people of Europe a smoking gun. The Democracy Shield that President von der Leyen is currently constructing will institutionalize these exact abuses, utilizing ‘trusted flaggers’ and ‘fact-checkers’ to pre-emptively neutralize dissent.
We call on all European parliamentarians and citizens who still believe in freedom to look at this evidence. The EU is weaponizing disinformation narratives to criminalize political opposition. This is not about safety; it is about survival for an unpopular technocratic elite. The EU’s censorship operating system must be dismantled.
To tackle the growing problem of the EU’s interference in speech and elections, MCC Brussels will shortly be launching the Democracy Interference Observatory in collaboration with other organisations, journalists and civil society groups.
