Section 230, EU, and the Fight Over the Internet
From AI tools to X’s algorithms, Europe is asserting its laws and redefining the rules of the global online public sphere.
Flashy headlines this week announced that “Paris prosecutors raid French offices of Elon Musk’s X”. As it often happens, headlines in social media start to take a life of their own, being shared and commented by people who have not read the articles, nor have an understanding of the context or background.
In this case, the search at X’s Paris office is part of a preliminary investigation into a range of alleged offenses, which in turn are a part of a year long regulatory conversation about EU’s regulations and American tech giants.
As a side note, it’s unfortunate that Elon Musk renamed Twitter “X” as news outlets now feel the need to bring his persona into the headline. Editors don’t trust that readers would understand a headline that says “Paris prosecutors raid French offices of X”. If Twitter would still be Twitter, the headlines would not say “Jack Dorsey’s Twitter”. It would just be Twitter.
Anyways, back to the topic of the day.
The French investigation, which also involves the EU wide police agency Europol, began in January 2025 over allegations that X's algorithm was used to interfere in French politics, now also includes a probe into Grok's dissemination of Holocaust denials from November 2025 and sexual deepfakes from January 2026. All of these are crimes in France, and in the European Union.
There is precedent, in 2024 France arrested Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram app, for enabling fraud, drug trafficking, organized crime, promotion of terrorism and cyberbullying on the Telegram platform.
Separately, the UK has opened investigations to X’s violations of internet safely laws, unlawful data extraction, and complicity in the possession of child sexual abuse materials. Additionally, several European countries, including UK, France, Spain and Greece are looking to follow Australia’s lead on restricting social media use from young children and teenagers.
EU Enforcing its Digital Laws; Top Actions taken in 2025
2025 was an eventful year for the European Union in enforcing its data protection laws; the AI Act, Digital Services Act (DSA), and Digital Markets Act (DMA).
This list from Euronews:
In April, Apple and Meta were fined €500 million and €200 million, respectively, for not complying with the Digital Markets Act. The fines came after the European Commission had concluded that Apple was preventing app developers from freely communicating with consumers, and that Meta’s “pay or consent” advertising model violated European users’ rights.
In September, Commission fined Google €2.95 billion over abusive practices in online advertising technology, this was the fourth penalty EU competition regulators have levied against Google over the past decade.
In December, the European Commission opened a formal antitrust investigation into Google's use of web publishers’ content without their knowledge or consent to train its AI models and produce AI overviews on search results pages.
In December, Meta commits to give EU users choice on personalized ads under the Digital Markets Act, Europeans now have the option to see less personalized ads on Facebook and Instagram if they want to
In December, following a two-year investigation, EU fined X €120 million for breaking the Digital Services Act rules on transparency. Breaches include the company’s deceptive use of its blue “verified” checkmark, the lack of transparency regarding its ads, and its failure to provide access to public data for research purposes.
There’s also the December 2025 lawsuit brought by the copyright collective GEMA in Munich, Germany, against Open AI. There is no sign of Europe letting these cases go, on the contrary.
In January 2026, the Commission launched an investigation against Grok and extended its ongoing investigation from December 2023 into X’s compliance with its recommender systems risk management obligations.
European nation states and the European Union are serious about protecting the freedom and rights of their citizens, and enforcing the laws that their democratically elected parliaments have passed.
U.S. relies on First Amendment and Section 230
The U.S. has a completely different philosophy when it comes to the freedom and rights of their citizens. Americans believe in a ‘Speech First, Regulation Later’ approach, while Europeans look at the platforms as infrastructures that must align with democratic norms. There are, however, many Americans who question the tech companies’ influence on the American society.
To understand the history of these ideals, and the history of the internet, we need to go back to 1996 when the U.S. Congress passed a law, Section 230, that protects Americans’ freedom of expression online by protecting the online intermediaries we all rely on.
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." (47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1)).
This means that anyone can say anything in social media, secured by their first amendment right, and the social media platform is not held accountable, only the individual person might be.
Section 230(c)(2)(A) does, however, state that service providers and users may not be held liable "for voluntary, "good faith" actions "to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected. This means that the platforms can moderate in good faith and will not held liable for restricting free speech.
Section 230 allows for platforms to do content moderation, but it does not require it. Platforms do it, because even Section 230 cannot protect them from being in violation of other laws if they are seen to amplify illegal content. With the addition of native AI tools, the platforms themselves are also creating content which is a new legal aspect for them to consider.
Section 230 is increasingly debated, with both Democratic and Republican lawmakers bringing forward arguments why the internet and social media would be better without it, while others oppose the repeal.
Democrats and Republicans are deeply divided on their reasons for reforming the law: Republicans want to strip Section 230 protections because social media companies moderate too much content; Democrats want it reformed because platforms aren’t doing enough to quash harmful misinformation.
- Brookings Institute January 22, 2021
Why This Matters Now
I started writing here in Substack in January 2024, thinking I would mostly cover how governments around the world enable the birth of new deeptech industries, and how those industries could be used by governments for economic growth. Unfortunately, since 2025, I find myself writing less and less about those topics, and more and more about the affects of the U.S. administration’s decisions on the global tech industries.
Why?
Because of the unpredictable and inconsistent way those decisions come about, and the dramatic effect that those decisions have both in the U.S. and abroad.
As an American living in Europe I’m trying to understand and communicate both sides, while reflecting my personal, lived experience in the technology industry since the time before Facebook, Twitter, or smartphones existed, and Google was just two years old.
Most people on social media criticizing or defending Elon Musk have no idea they are doing it protected and enabled by their local governments. Most people in these conversations also do not understand that the ability for Google, Apple, X, or Meta to break laws (EU) or enable their users to break laws (US) has led, and will increasingly lead to erosions in election security, national security, defence and economic autonomy, and transatlantic trust.
If the American tradition asks ‘how do we protect individuals from government overreach’, and the European tradition asks ‘how do we protect democratic society from systemic harm’, they are both precious values.
The question in front of us may look like who is going to control the digital public square, Europe or America, and in the short term we cannot avoid confrontation. But the underlying debate should be whether sovereign actors can design rules that preserve both individual freedom and social and democratic stability.
About Deep Policy
Stay relevant and connect the dots.
Hi, I’m Petra Söderling. Welcome to Deep Policy, a space where I help you understand how governments, technology, and innovation policy shape the world around us.
This newsletter and blog continue the conversation I began in my book Government and Innovation – the Economic Developer’s Guide to Our Future, and on my podcast Deep Pockets with Petra Soderling. If you’ve ever wondered why governments pour billions into quantum, AI, or biotech, or how geopolitics bends the path of technology, you’re in the right place.
Every week, I share a mix of deep-dive essays, timely analysis, and cultural reflections, always with an eye toward what matters for you: the choices being made now that will shape your future economy, your industry, and your society.
Additional Resources
For more analysis, insight, maybe some entertainment, please feel free to explore these:
Petra Soderling & Co Advisory Services
Consulting governments, NGOs and companies on the economic and financial impact of deeptech. It’s not just me, it’s a whole team! Selected testimonials for my work from private clients can be found here. A banner with most notable public clients can be found here.
Deep Pockets Podcast
Every second week, more or less diligently, I bring forward a guest to discuss all things in the intersection of government and innovation.
The Book: Government and Innovation - the Economic Developer’s Guide to our Future
My 2022 Amazon Hot New Release (editorial pick) is divided in three sections; the Tools that governments have to create new innovative industries, Examples from five countries who’ve done it right, and a How To section for implementation. Available in paperback or hard cover.
The audiobook: Government and Innovation - the Economic Developer’s Guide to our Future
My 2022 Amazon Hot New Release (editorial pick) is divided in three sections; the Tools that governments have to create new innovative industries, Examples from five countries who’ve done it right, and a How To section for implementation. Available in paperback or hard cover.
The Quantum Strategy Institute
In my role as the Head of Government and Consortium Relations at QSI, I’ve written many papers on how public quantum strategies support economic growth. Explore the full website or find my articles directly here. The views in this newsletter and subsequent social media posts are mine, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Quantum Strategy Institute.