Freedom of expression for citizens (MfB). Why is that?

Sven von Storch: The DSA has been legally binding in the EU since 25 August. Brussels wants to ensure more democracy and security on the internet. But as always, when the EU promises its citizens a good thing with flowery words, it means the exact opposite.

MfB: Could you be more specific?

Sven von Storch: What EU Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton is getting with the DSA is nothing more than a licence to shut down all social services, opinion platforms and alternative media in the EU. The only condition is that Brussels identifies "social unrest" or another emergency, such as a pandemic, in a country. It can then block free access to the internet from one day to the next. EU citizens then wake up one morning to find that their messenger service or favourite news portal is no longer accessible.

MfB: Why is the media reacting so meekly to this monstrosity? No one is seriously protesting the DSA.

Sven von Storch: As usual, it is the opacity and secrecy of EU legislation that prevents something like this from quickly becoming public. Torture yourself with a 102-page pamphlet that only people with a law degree can half understand. That is one thing.

The second thing is that this is a law that will give Brussels room for manoeuvre in the future, the monstrous effects of which are now being prepared for by citizens in homeopathic doses. The effects of the DSA have been seen, for example, in the recent riots and revolts in France. In response to the protests, President Macron engaged in a game of blocking social media services. And it seems to have been implemented. For several days or even weeks, no private videos or messages got out.

MfB: But there have been reports of excesses of violence and protests by migrants in French suburbs.

Sven von Storch: Yes, on RND, Zeit, Deutschlandfunk and in the ÖRR media, where you probably wouldn't find the term "migrant". That's why the state and state-affiliated media will continue to spread their news, opinions and categorisations - no matter what state of emergency the EU declares. Freedom of information will then be replaced by a totalitarian, censored corridor of opinion in which only the state media will disseminate opinions and views, thus effectively controlling the moods and attitudes of citizens as a monopoly.

MfB: German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas's (SPD) law on network advocacy sounds like an orphan by comparison.

Sven von Storch: That's a good point. The Network Enforcement Act was the inspiration for the EU Digital Services Act. Germany is well prepared in every respect. It is also not surprising that Germany has the highest internet censorship of all EU countries. According to the DSA Transparency Database, German-language posts rank first in the EU with 29 per cent. This is followed by English and Italian posts.

MfB: How can people defend themselves against internet censorship?

Sven von Storch: Every citizen, every reader of alternative media such as Freie Welt and other platforms, should realise what such a law would do during a coronavirus pandemic: without information, without the expertise of independent scientists such as Professor Bhakdi, Arne Burkhard and Stefan Hockertz, and the moderate insights of critical doctors, constitutional lawyers and legal experts, many citizens would be virtually clueless. They simply no longer knew what law and order meant. Many of today's unvaccinated would even get vaccinated without the constant warnings of critical citizens via social media.

It is therefore extremely important to be prepared for the worst-case scenario. There are technical ways to bypass the internet blocks in order to maintain access to news portals. I am not exaggerating when I say that independent information is vital for survival in the dictatorship of total control of public opinion that the EU wants to establish. Citizens and our readers need to realise this and prepare for it.

MfB: Mr von Storch, thank you for the interview.