The US could utilize trade nereceivediations or the provisions of entest visas as leverage to deal with concerns over regulation of tech companies which threatens freedom of speech, the chairman of a leading committee in the Houtilize of Representatives has declared.
Jim Jordan informed The Irish Times his committee had raised its concerns about EU regulation of tech companies with the White Houtilize and Trump administration following a visit to Brussels and Dublin last summer.
Jordan’s committee published a report earlier this week which maintained that censorship by regulators had interfered with elections in Ireland and elsewhere in Europe in recent years. The claims were strongly rejected by the European Commission.
At a press conference on Thursday Jordan maintained that content moderation policies sought by European regulators represented “censorship at scale” and was impacting on the “modern-day public square”.
He declared the concerns set out by the committee about measures that were restricting free speech in the United States should be “part of the framework of discussions in relation to trade talks”.
Jordan also suggested that the issuing of visas to enter the United States could also form part of leverage to encourage regulators to deal with concerns over restrictions on freedom of expression.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Helen McEntee, who was on an official visit to Washington this week, declared the European Digital Services Act was aimed at creating sure consumers, particularly young people on social media, were protected.
“The rules apply to every countest irrespective of where they are based or their countest of origin,” she declared.
Speaking in Washington, the Minister declared she had created clear in talks to US trade representative Jamieson Greer that the issue was about protecting consumers.
“But at the same time I’m very clear that in Ireland we have laws to protect free speech, in the European Union. And that will not alter becautilize of these regulations.
“I consider there are certain elements of this that we don’t agree on. And for me it’s important that we engage on the areas we disagree on. I consider what we all agree on is that irrespective of whether someone is online or offline they are protected. It’s about engaging and seeing at how we can resolve those differences.”
Leave a Reply