I believe it is needed. There is a growing cloud of censorship hanging over Europe.
In my view, the more corrupt a political system becomes, the more likely it is to restrict freedom of speech.
I also believe that undemocratic decisions and policies are increasingly being imposed on the people of Europe.
Russia Today
Let’s take the Russia Today (RT) website as an example.
Russia Today (RT) is a Russian state-controlled international news network launched in 2005. Funded by the Russian government, RT broadcasts news and current affairs in multiple languages and targets international audiences. It has been described by the Russian government as a tool for presenting Russia’s perspective on global events, while critics and several Western governments have accused it of spreading state propaganda and disinformation.
The European Union and the United States have taken different approaches to access to the Russia Today (RT) website.
In March 2022, the European Union adopted sanctions suspending RT’s broadcasting and distribution activities. As a result, the RT website became inaccessible to most internet users in the EU, with many internet service providers blocking access in order to comply with the sanctions.
By contrast, the United States has not imposed a comparable legal ban on access to the RT website. While RT has faced sanctions and has been removed from many television and social media platforms, its website remains legally accessible in the United States.
Personal Remarks
To some extent, one may argue that the United States has become the gatekeeper of freedom of speech in the free world.
Freedom of speech should be unrestricted. Once restrictions are imposed, it is no longer absolute freedom of speech.
Limiting freedom of speech inevitably requires someone to decide what may or may not be said. In that sense, it reflects a particular set of values or priorities being imposed on others.
- Russia Today
I used to visit the Russia Today (RT) website when it was still accessible in the European Union. I wasn’t a regular reader—not every day, or even every week—but I would browse it a few times a year.
One of the things I appreciated was the quality of some of its documentaries. Many focused on social and political issues in the European Union and the United States, and they often addressed topics that received less attention in parts of the Western media. Whether one agreed with RT’s conclusions or not, I found it interesting to compare its reporting with that of Western news outlets. Seeing different perspectives helped me form my own opinion.
What I saw as RT’s main weakness was that it rarely applied the same level of scrutiny to Russia itself. The focus was overwhelmingly on problems in the EU and the US, while issues inside Russia received far less critical coverage.
In my view, a similar imbalance can sometimes be found in parts of the Western mainstream media, which are often highly critical of Russia while being less critical of their own political establishments.
As for why RT was banned in the EU, the official justification was that it formed part of Russia’s state propaganda and disinformation apparatus following the invasion of Ukraine. Personally, I suspect there were additional political considerations behind the decision.
Source
Trump pushes UN ‘free speech’ declaration in veiled attack on EU tech regulation