Introduction
On Tuesday, following orders from Senator Marco Rubio, the US Department of State revoked and restricted visas for five Europeans accused of leading a “censorship ecosystem” that pressures US tech platforms to remove content. Rubio justified this as a defense of the First Amendment, but it sparked a direct confrontation with the European Union and revealed how Trumpism is reshaping media policy in the United States.
Key Figures and Their Relevance
The sanctioned individuals are not minor figures. Among them is Frenchman Thierry Breton, a former European Commissioner and the main architect of the Digital Services Act (DSA), known for his public clashes with Elon Musk. Alongside Breton are executives from civil society organizations dedicated to documenting hate speech and misinformation on social media and advising legal assistance for victims. The message is clear: the US personalizes punishment and seeks to discipline those pushing rules that make Donald Trump and large platforms uncomfortable.
Official Argument vs. Internal Actions
The official argument is “extraterritorial censorship.” According to Rubio, laws like the DSA force global platforms to moderate content, affecting what a US user sees. The US government argues that allowing this equates to surrendering sovereignty. However, the problem lies in denouncing external censorship while simultaneously pressuring internal content moderation.
Impact on US Media and Journalists
Public Criticism of Broadcasters
Trump has publicly called for the revocation of broadcast licenses for ABC, NBC, and CBS due to what he deems “100% negative” coverage. Simultaneously, the Federal Communications Commission initiated investigations into alleged “biased editing” of news programs.
Government Actions Against Public Media
The deepest blow came to public media. In March, the US Global Media Agency was dismantled after nearly 1,600 employees were dismissed. Funding was eliminated for Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and Radio y TV Martí. In August, a $110 million cut to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting left NPR and PBS on the brink of bankruptcy. This is not austerity; it’s political purging.
European Response and Potential Retaliation
Europe responded with indignation and is studying retaliatory measures for 2026: visa reciprocity and fines up to 6% of global revenue for Big Tech under the DSA. The same argument is emerging in Mexico, which is pushing reforms like the controversial Article 30-B of the tax reform, obliging digital platforms to provide real-time access to their databases. In Washington, this is seen as violating the USMCA —Articles 19.11 and 19.17— and visa restrictions for SAT and Economy Secretariat executives under the same charge of “digital interventionism” are not ruled out.
Key Questions and Answers
- Who are the sanctioned Europeans? Among them are Frenchman Thierry Breton, a former European Commissioner and the main architect of the Digital Services Act (DSA), along with executives from civil society organizations focused on documenting hate speech and misinformation on social media.
- What is the official argument for these sanctions? The US claims that laws like the DSA enable extraterritorial censorship, affecting what US users see online and thus violating American sovereignty.
- How has the US responded to criticism regarding its own media landscape? Trump has called for the revocation of broadcast licenses for major networks and the US government has initiated investigations into alleged biased editing of news programs. Public media has faced severe cuts, with nearly 1,600 employees dismissed from the US Global Media Agency and significant funding reductions for prominent outlets like NPR and PBS.
- What is Europe’s response to these actions? Europe has expressed indignation and is considering retaliatory measures, including visa restrictions and fines for Big Tech under the DSA. Mexico’s digital platform regulations are also facing scrutiny for potential USMCA violations.
