EU removes 'offensive' blog post attacking internet campaigners against new copyright rules
Activists were referred to as a 'mob' and article suggested they had been tricked by paid-for campaigns
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The EU Commission has removed a strange and angry blog post that attacked internet campaigners, admitting its language was not appropriate and that it could be offensive.
The post was ostensibly a response to the outpouring of anger over the EU's planned copyright directive, which introduces a whole host of new rules.
Supporters of the directive argue that it is necessary to ensure that copyright holders can protect their content, by ensuring that platforms such as YouTube ensure that their users are not uploading other people's videos.
But campaigners against it say that it will fundamentally change how the internet works. Some suggest that it will "ban memes", by forcing websites to automatically check for the use of any media that is owned by somebody else, and that it could stop websites such as Google and YouTube from working.
The blog post from the commission appeared aimed at taking on those criticisms. It referred to campaigners as a "mob" and suggested they were unwittingly working for websites like Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.
That immediately prompted another flurry of criticism as campaigners argued the post had wrongly characterised them.
It has now been removed by the EU Commission and said that it recognised it had not used the right language.
"This article published by the Commission services was intended to reply to concerns, but also to misinterpretations that often surround the copyright directive proposal," a note that has replaced the original article reads.
"We acknowledge that its language and title were not appropriate and we apologise for the fact that it has been seen as offending.
"That is why we removed this article from our Medium account."
Before it was removed, the article was headlined "The Copyright Directive: how the mob was told to save the dragon and slay the knight".
Much of it was written strangely, attacking campaigners and attempting to take on what it claimed were untruths in aggressive terms.
"Oh and by the way, no matter what some people (and paid-for campaigns) may tell you, you will never be prevented from having a laugh online," one part reads. "WE ARE NOT BANNING MEMES."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments