EU Parliament, March 9, 2026
Written questions to EU Commission E-001160/2026
Documents disclosed in a report from the US House Judiciary Committee show that, as part of the EU Internet Forum, the Commission promoted a handbook of borderline content in relation to violent extremism that explicitly classifies ‘populist rhetoric’, ‘anti-EU content’, ‘anti-elite content’, ‘political satire’, ‘meme subculture’ and ‘anti-LGBTIQ content’ as problematic categories to be monitored or limited by platforms, even though these are in themselves lawful forms of political or social expression.
1. How does the Commission justify equating lawful Eurosceptic or anti-establishment speech and political satire with ‘violent extremism’ in an official handbook, and on what precise legal basis did it urge platforms to use these categories for content moderation beyond what is strictly illegal under EU or national law?
2. What safeguards did the Commission put in place to ensure
that such guidance would not result in systematic discrimination against
peaceful opposition movements, conservative viewpoints on migration and gender,
or satirical criticism of EU institutions and policies?
