The European Union (EU) is currently full of concerns over Elon Musk’s recent political engagements on his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). At the heart of their unease is Musk’s livestreamed discussion with Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. EU officials fear this might amplify extremist views, spread misinformation, and interfere with democratic processes. However, the selective outrage over Musk’s activities raises critical questions about transparency and priorities within the EU.
The Hypocrisy of Selective Oversight
When George Soros-backed media and their EU allies—such as Frans Timmermans and Vera Jourová—used their platforms to promote specific political narratives, the same EU watchdogs were notably silent. These media outlets pushed agendas under the guise of “progressivism,” enjoying immunity from scrutiny even as they swayed public opinion and elections across Europe. The EU’s current concern about “foreign interference” and “election manipulation” feels oddly misplaced given their tacit approval of politically motivated campaigns when the narrative suited their interests.
This hypocrisy underscores a troubling reality: the EU’s regulatory gaze falls squarely on those who challenge their ideological status quo. Musk’s platform, with its promise of free speech and resistance to censorship, threatens the tightly controlled narratives that EU bureaucrats have grown accustomed to. Rather than championing transparency and fairness, their actions reveal a self-serving agenda to maintain control.
When Keir Starmer sent “advisors” to help Kamala Harris with her election efforts – all of Europe and the UK were equally silent. That was brazen election interference if one had to be guided by their own standards in Europe.
Ignoring the Real Crisis: Ad Fraud
While EU officials obsess over Musk’s political interactions, they have remained disturbingly indifferent to the rampant problem of ad fraud—a crisis that has drained billions from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs are the backbone of the European economy, yet their struggles with fraudulent online advertising practices have been largely ignored by the very regulators claiming to protect the public interest. The lack of transparency in digital advertising—where fake clicks and bots siphon away advertising budgets—has gone unchecked, costing SMEs far more than Musk’s livestream ever could.
Where was the outrage when hardworking business owners poured their limited resources into ad platforms only to see their budgets wasted? Where were the calls for accountability when automated systems generated fake engagement metrics, rendering their investments futile? The EU’s failure to address these pressing issues exposes the hollow nature of its claims to prioritize fairness and transparency.
A Self-Interest Masquerading as Public Concern
The real motivation behind the EU’s actions becomes clearer when viewed through the lens of self-interest. By targeting Musk and his platform, EU officials aim to safeguard their own positions, fearing the power of dissenting voices that could challenge their authority. The focus on Musk is less about protecting democracy and more about ensuring the survival of an entrenched bureaucratic elite.
The EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA), touted as a tool to ensure fairness, seems weaponized against platforms like X that refuse to toe the line. While these bureaucrats scrutinize Musk’s activities, they conveniently overlook the failures within their own systems, from neglected SMEs to the unchecked power of entrenched media networks.
The Path Forward: Real Transparency
True transparency should focus on issues that impact ordinary citizens and businesses—such as combating ad fraud, ensuring fair competition, and holding all media outlets to the same standards of accountability. The EU’s current priorities reflect an organization more concerned with protecting its own image than addressing the real challenges facing its people.
Instead of monitoring Musk, EU officials should redirect their efforts to creating a level playing field for businesses and citizens alike. They should demand transparency not just from platforms like X, but also from the legacy media networks that have enjoyed unchecked influence for far too long.
A Weak Position in a New Global Order
The EU finds itself in an increasingly precarious position on the global stage. With its energy security beholden to the United States for liquefied natural gas, or reliant on the precarious goodwill of Turkey and Russia, its autonomy is under siege. Meanwhile, the military balance of power and dominance in space—the ultimate strategic frontier—rests firmly in the hands of the United States, Russia, and China. Between Trump’s “America First” resurgence, Putin’s calculated geopolitical plays, and China’s relentless ascent, what we are witnessing is the emergence of a power-sharing arrangement between these three superpowers. In this evolving global order, the EU appears destined to be treated as a secondary stakeholder—much like smaller, less influential nations—rather than as an equal player. This reality underscores the need for EU officials to refocus on genuine issues affecting their citizens and businesses, rather than entangling themselves in superficial battles of ideological control.
Conclusion
The EU’s actions reveal a disturbing trend of self-interest masquerading as public concern. By focusing their energies on Musk while ignoring the plight of SMEs and the pervasive issue of ad fraud, they expose their true priorities. Europe deserves better—leaders who care about fostering economic growth, promoting fairness, and safeguarding democracy for all, not just for themselves and their ideological allies.