Europe Needs to Develop Its Own Tech and Regulate Big Tech Algorithms

Much of the social media infrastructure that shapes political discourse today is privately controlled, American-based, and built on an absolutist interpretation of free speech that the rest of the world – including the European Union – neither shares nor benefits from.

As revealed in reports like Semafor’s coverage of group chats that changed American politics, the consolidation of power in opaque, privately owned digital spaces has profound consequences not only within the U.S., but globally.

This problem is not new. But it has become more urgent, particularly for the European Union, which prides itself on democratic governance, social protections, and human rights standards that increasingly diverge from U.S. practices in digital spaces. If the EU wants to maintain sovereignty over its information ecosystem – and protect its citizens from the fallout of America’s libertarian internet policies – it must invest heavily in local tech, social media, and communications infrastructure.

At the same time, it must force Big Tech to submit to algorithmic governance and transparency as a precondition for access to the European market.

The stakes are clear. Platforms like Substack have openly chosen to monetize Nazi content under the guise of “free speech,” a reality confirmed by multiple investigations. When confronted, Substack’s leadership did not deny the issue; instead, they defended it, arguing that even white supremacist propaganda deserves commercial viability under their interpretation of free expression. This is the end result of America’s uniquely absolutist First Amendment culture – where even genocidal ideologies are seen as legitimate “opinions” in the marketplace of ideas.

The First Amendment is an American framework, not a universal one. In the EU, freedom of expression is a fundamental right – but it is not unlimited. The European Convention on Human Rights allows restrictions on speech that incites hatred, violence, or discrimination. EU law explicitly prohibits Holocaust denial, hate speech, and the glorification of Nazism. Yet because the digital architecture remains dominated by American companies with little incentive to comply with European standards, citizens across the continent are forced to endure streams of hateful, dangerous content that would be illegal if published in traditional media.

This is just one of many examples. Russian propaganda influencing elections all over Europe using US or even Chinese-based social platforms, far-right content and hate speech spreading unchecked on social media… The EU has little to no control over what its citizens consume online and with Trump as American president, U.S. Big Tech have even more room to do as they please without suffering any consequences.

The issue is not merely theoretical. It is about sovereignty. It is about safety. It is about the ability of democratic societies to set the rules under which public discourse happens – rather than being passive subjects to foreign corporate policies designed primarily to maximize profit.

The solution is twofold.

First, the EU must significantly invest in homegrown, locally accountable technology. It is unacceptable that Europe, with its 450 million people and substantial economic weight, remains dependent on American platforms for everything from social networking to payment processing. We need European alternatives that are subject to European laws, built by European companies, and accountable to European publics. The same ambition that powered the GDPR, the Green Deal, and the single market must now be directed toward the digital sphere.

Second, the EU must impose strict conditions on foreign tech companies operating within its borders. At minimum, companies like Meta, Google, X, and Substack (just to name a few) should be required to: