The European Fine Against X Becomes a Political Case

Source: La Repubblica – “Fine Imposed on X, the Rubio and Vance–Musk Controversy Erupts”, 6 December 2025

A €120 million fine and the outbreak of a geopolitical clash

The European Union has fined X (formerly Twitter) €120 million, accusing the platform of systemic violations of the Digital Services Act: insufficient advertising transparency, failure to ensure traceability of illegal content, and opaque data management practices. According to Brussels, the decision does not concern content moderation, but rather the need to protect users from manipulation and misleading advertising.

This time, however, the response did not come solely from Elon Musk, but directly from Washington.

Rubio, Vance and the rhetoric of an “attack on America”

The European sanction was described by leading figures of the new U.S. administration as a hostile act against the United States. Senator Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance openly referred to:

• an “attack on American companies,”

• “disguised censorship,”

• “European interference with freedom of speech.”

Instead of addressing the substance of the alleged violations, the White House has turned the case into a symbolic confrontation over control of the global digital sphere.

Why Brussels insists: the issue is power, not opinion

As La Repubblica explains, the EU is not assessing X’s editorial line, but its infrastructural behaviour. The identified shortcomings include:

• the lack of effective systems for reporting illegal content,

• failures in algorithmic transparency,

• the facilitated dissemination of undeclared political advertising,

• insufficient protection of users from informational manipulation.

According to Brussels, a platform with the reach and influence of X cannot evade minimum rules of digital security. The American narrative framing the sanction as “censorship” obscures a fundamental point: the fine concerns transparency, not opinions.

Why this matters directly to users and Algopolio’s role

A platform that fails to guarantee traceability, transparency and information reliability produces tangible effects:

• manipulation of public opinion,

• rapid spread of false content,

• deterioration of democratic quality,

• lack of accountability for harms caused by algorithms.

In a context where Big Tech increasingly becomes an informational weapon for governments and economic actors, citizens risk being the weakest link.

Algopolio intervenes to:

• clarify how platforms and their algorithms function,

• protect individuals harmed by unfair digital practices,

• promote transparent and verifiable information,

• defend the principle that freedom of expression cannot be used as a shield to evade technological responsibility.

When political power and digital power intertwine, a strong civic watchdog is more necessary than ever to safeguard users and democracy. Algopolio was created for this purpose: to give voice and tools to those who, in an environment dominated by technological giants, risk being left without rights.