From the "the official Twitter of the U.S. Mission to the EU." Good job to the "Censorship-Industrial Complex" dipshits for helping authoritarians target their critics.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Honestly I was a non American working for Bellingcat or similar organisation then I wouldn't trust the current administrator to keep me safe, even if they did let me in.
Protecting the propoganda of Musk.X.Twitter is the driving force. Surely, they want to maintain their channels of reach on all platforms. Especially US based like facebook, through whom they can more easily inject the Palantir surveilance tech.
A really clarifying comment I heard recently is that self-proclaimed free speech warriors are really talking about the freedom to monetize their speech. That's why they get worked up about speaking tours bring disrupted but say nary a peep about grad students being arrested got op-eds.
Highly recommended talk in this context, by Salim Abdool Karim: "Science under threat: the politics of institutionalised disinformation" at The Royal Society ->
In a functioning democracy, public discourse should enable three core epistemic functions:
Verification – Truth must be testable, evidence-based
Deliberation – Disagreement must be engaged with, not silenced
Accountability – Power must be answerable for its claims & actions
This is the VDA Framework
VDA isn’t just about how we talk, it’s about how we build reality together in democratic systems. It lets citizens test truth, challenge power, and disagree without breaking the system. But what happens when institutions don’t just fail VDA,
they invert it?
This post from the U.S. Mission to the EU:
“The ‘disinformation industry’ is a scam to monitor, censor, and demonetize Americans.”
Is not a defence of speech. It’s an epistemic attack on the very idea of truth-making. This is what's happening:
Verification is inverted. Disinformation researchers aren’t framed as seeking truth. They’re framed as inventing lies to justify control. Truth seeking itself is cast as a cover story.
Deliberation is rejected. By calling the field a “scam,” no engagement is needed. No argument, no evidence, just dismissal. You don’t debate scammers. You expose them.
Accountability is preemptively denied If criticism = censorship, then all scrutiny becomes persecution. The institution shields itself by claiming it’' under attack. This isn't openness. It's epistemic insulation.
Comments
they have become the grift, the distinction between belief and grift is gone.
Verification – Truth must be testable, evidence-based
Deliberation – Disagreement must be engaged with, not silenced
Accountability – Power must be answerable for its claims & actions
This is the VDA Framework
they invert it?
“The ‘disinformation industry’ is a scam to monitor, censor, and demonetize Americans.”
Is not a defence of speech. It’s an epistemic attack on the very idea of truth-making. This is what's happening: