EU Parliament Paid News Publisher AFP To Create Bogus Propaganda Video In Favor Of EU Copyright Directive
from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept
So we recently wrote about the bizarre situation in the EU whereby the EU Parliament's official Twitter feed had tweeted a pure propaganda video in support of the EU Copyright Directive. This was weird on many levels. First of all, the Copyright Directive has not yet been voted upon, and you would think that the EU Parliament itself should be neutral on the question of whether or not a law should be passed -- especially one with as much controversy as the Copyright Directive. Second, the video was filled with a bunch of blatantly false information (mostly from MEP Axel Voss). It's one thing for the EU Parliament to be promoting a specific outcome on a legislative vote, and it's another altogether to support that with false information delivered by just one MEP. Does the EU Parliament do this on other issues as well? The third oddity, is that the video certainly looked very professionally produced, raising questions of just who put it together.
MEP Julia Reda used her position as an MEP to ask those questions of the Parliament and now has the answer. The EU Parliament -- for reasons that are still unclear -- paid Agence France Press (AFP) to produce the video:
I know now how the @europarl_EN came to publish an extremely biased video for the #copyright reform. The good news, it doesn't look like the administration deliberately tried to manipulate the public debate. What actually happened is equally worrying, though:#SaveyourInternet pic.twitter.com/PfcfGI5xOM
— Julia Reda (@Senficon) March 7, 2019
AFP, of course, is a giant publisher that stands to potentially benefit from Article 11 in particular. And, apparently, AFP has been one of the more aggressive lobbying organizations in Brussels pushing for Article 11. Hell, all the way back in 2005, AFP actually sued Google for linking to its stories (spoiler alert: it did not win). So for the EU Parliament to then use public funds to ask a clearly interested party to produce a propaganda video seems highly questionable. This is the akin to say, the US Congress asking Pfizer to produce a video that will go out under "Congress" official imprimatur, about prescription drug pricing. That would be a scandal. Yet, in the EU, not too many officials seem particularly bothered by this.
Of course, it should be noted that AFP does not exactly have the greatest track record on copyright itself. In 2010, the company was caught having used someone's photo of the earthquake aftermath in Haiti without licensing, and when called on it, AFP sued the photographer with a bizarre argument that anything that was posted to Twitter was free for anyone to use (no, really). Eventually, AFP was forced to pay out $1.2 million for that debacle. You'd think that experience might make the company a little more careful about supporting extremist copyright positions, but for some reason in the copyright debates, the maximalists never think the law will seriously apply back to them.
Meanwhile, instead, AFP is publishing hysterically misleading articles (that feed out to various licensees of AFP content) all about how evil Google is actively lobbying over Article 11. No, really. While (at least) the AFP article notes that AFP supports Article 11, it leaves out its active participation in the lobbying effort -- including the creation of the aforementioned video, framing the entire story about how big bad Google is doing all the lobbying over the law.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: article 11, article 13, axel voss, bias, corruption, eu copyright directive, eu parliament, julia reda, propaganda
Companies: afp
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
Seeing how the European Union is ignoring the will of the people feels very similar to what happened with the FCC. If you remember, FCC’s Ajit Pai ignored millions of outcries and was hellbent on repealing Net Neutrality, because ISPs were whining that they weren’t getting enough money. Without Net Neutrality, our internet would turn into a highway traffic where our internet would be throttled and tampered with.
Similarily, Axel Voss and those supporting this wretched Article 13 are being “seduced” by big media companies that are whining because they don’t have enough money. And just like Ajit Pai, they also decieved the public and ignored the will of its people. It really makes me think that there’s a bigger picture to this. And the fact that they’re calling us “brainwashed” makes it more likely that the EU is the one being brainwashed.
(By the way, I apologize if there are Misspellings on this comment. I upgraded to an iPhone XR, and it did not make it easier to type.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
If the tiitle to this story is true, it smells like someone needs to change the grease in the fryer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
“If the title to this story is true, it smells like someone needs to change the grease in the fryer”
To be honest, I don’t quite understand what ‘changing the grease in the fryer” is supposed to imply. Today’s my first say on Techdirt (though I have read articles about this Copyright Directive controversy), so I am kind of new to this whole ‘putting my opinion for millions to see’ thing.
But if I’m correct (which I’m probably not) about what you’re saying, then it probably would be more fair if the governments listened to the truth that big companies shouldn’t control what the government does, and that the government shouldn’t ignore the people they’re supposed to govern.
And i know that there are more than two sides to every argument, and I respect that. And I don’t plan on hurting anyone’s feelings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
"Changing the grease in the fryer" is likely an idiom for replacing the people who are currently in the EU Parliament.
The act of frying causes bits of food to get separated from food you put into the deep fryer. Those bits don't all get removed when you take the food out, so as the grease in a deep fryer gets used, it collects more and more bits of food. Eventually, you have to clean it out, because it's nasty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like
Thanks, TFG. That makes sense now.
Let’s hope that those MEPs who pledged to reject the new Copyright Directive stay true to their word. They probably only pledged this just to get the public to stop nagging at them. And if that’s true, then we could be in trouble.
And to be honest, I’m typing this in bed because I currently am feeling sick. My voice lost many octaves recently and I have been having a dry mouth feeling. Not even water could rid that feeling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
Welcome, make yourself at home.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like
Thanks, nasch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
Or toss the thing out since it's beyond repair.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This Feels Very Similar. And I don’t Like It.
Indeed the Copyright Directive is beyond repair.
To the words of Ramsay: “It’s RAW!”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abolish Copyright
It is an abomination that will only get worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Abolish Copyright
Indeed the Copyright is an abomination. An abomination made by an abomination. I may live in America, but I don’t want the EU censoring the world’s internet.
It already is worse. Many different countries are shutting down the internet so that nobody can access them. Trump stated during his campaign that he wanted to close/ban the internet. Ajit Pai repeals Net Neutrality, and now the EU is planning on removing every bit of data and content off of the internet.
There are at least two things that could be going on:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
You forgot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
Aliens? Really? Is that supposed to be a Simpsons reference?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
It's probably not a reference at all and just a friendly reminder that you are heading into conspiracy-land.
And this might sound a bit rude if I'm mistaken, but maybe avoid posting about politics when not sober?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
“...avoid posting about politics when not sober”
You don’t have to worry about me not being sober. I don’t drink wine or beer anyways. I’m only 19 years old and in my second semester in College.
And don’t worry. Your comment was not rude at all. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
Ah, if there's one thing 19 year old college students are well known for, it's being sober and never breaking any laws, especially drinking age and drug laws.
(this is a joke in case the sarcasm is intercepted by my keyboard)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
Actually nasch, I actually am 19 years old. My birthday typically isn’t till December.
Also, I don’t drink wine or beer because I ain’t taking any risks. Being a student at Pittsburgh Technical College showed me what responsibility is, and honestly, it does good. Thankfully with the Critical Thinking class I have, I will be able to analyze the reasons, fallacies, and form conclusions easier and thorough than before.
No offense btw.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
I don't doubt that you're 19, I was just mentioning that being 19 and in college does not imply that you do not drink.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
True.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
"Aliens? Really? Is that supposed to be a Simpsons reference?"
You will find that Techdirt is haunted by one very persistent troll who keeps popping up every time the topic even remotely touches on "copyright".
And one of his regular sticks is to every now and then run an "out there" one-liner so he can provoke a response and marginalize the respondee.
You'll get to know him if you stick around - we have many names for him, since every actual nick he tries to use gets banned right quick which means he's stuck posting as an "anonymous coward" (AC).
Personally I like to refer to him as Baghdad Bob, as a salute to his posting style in his previous incarnation as "Bobmail". Others call him out_of_the_blue, Hamilton, jhon, blue, etc, depending on under which nick they got to know him first.
His main hobby appears to be e-mail address lists and dreaming of the soon-to-come day when his raging hate-boner will be satisfied by the lamentations of a few million pirates being carted off in chains.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Abolish Copyright
Oh. That makes sense.
The reason I mentioned Simpsons was because if I remember correctly there were several episodes that had Alien Invaders (or something). I could be mixing it up by accident, and I apologize if I did)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For all the BS and Fake news, fake facts..
Isnt there a law against any of this?
Instigating a riot??
Why arnt any of them looking for FACTS? Or listening to those that Hired them?
At least get an opinion from your own family..
Would love to see a few people thrown in jail for misrepresentation of facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For all the BS and Fake news, fake facts..
"Or listening to those that Hired them?"
Oh I think if you investigate far enough you will find they are. However, I suspect they will make investigating them (and reporting on it) a crime... if they haven't already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's all for the poor authors
AFP's plea to support article 11 so that war correspondents don't starve conveniently forgot to mention that story about the time they "stole" 1 million from a photographer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's all for the poor authors
Part of me almost wishes they had won in that case. It would have been a grave injustice and bad for the photographer. But, it would have been funny to see them trying to sue people who used things from their Twitter feed, with the defence being that AFP literally said in court that it was OK for them to do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Should the EU steal a video? So, of course they paid for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That has to be a conflict of interest
Whoever was aware of this in the UE parliament need to step down or be removed from office. The government doesn't seem to care that it is promoting things that would harm citizens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
“The government doesn’t seem to care that it is promoting things that would harm citizens”
That seems to be happening way too often these past years. The Net Neutrality repeal occurred despite millions of people arguing against the repeal. And I think that it gave many governments the wrong idea and they too are ignoring their own citizens’ rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
Governments around the world are promoting pseudoscciences, wars, and laws that are harming citizens. They should all be absolved of power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
"Who elected these idiots!?"
We get the government we deserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
Chip! That's your cue!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
"Who elected these idiots!?"
We get the government we deserve.
I feel like I am watching a train wreck in slow motion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That has to be a conflict of interest
It should be said that the copyright harmonization effort is done by a majority of people that wasn't elected, they are bureaucrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wot?
So, the EU parliament is paying the company who is paying lobbyists to lobby for their position to make propoganda to support their position.
Huh?
This payment to make the video is obviously immoral. Is it illegal?
I bloody well hope so, and if not, the damn parliamentarians should be drafting such laws. How about the "You cant use public funds to lobby for laws Act" or the "Corruption is a bad look Act".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wot?
This leads us to a possible FOIA-type request: a list of all instances in which the EU parliament paid third-parties for documents, videos, etc. in relation to proposed laws. Wikipedia says one has to be a citizen or resident of Europe to make such a request, and my paperwork hasn't come through yet; any volunteers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wot?
"This payment to make the video is obviously immoral. Is it illegal? "
Probably. Mind you, the EU commission hasn't given a single fuck about what is illegal in the past, why should they start now?
With ACTA they actually tried to get MEP's to sign NDA's around the treaty the parliament was supposed to sign as a condition for allowing the MEP's to actually READ the damn thing first.
Yes, you got that right. The EU parliament was supposed to vote on an international treaty without being shown what was in it. Or, if they were shown, to sign a document forbidding them to tell the citizenry what was in the treaty. Which is, incidentally, illegal to even ask of an EU parliamentary member.
They also tried to push the ACTA signing as a last minute surprise into a parliamentary session which was about north sea cod fishing quotas, to ensure only the bought stooges would be present to vote.
Immoral? That doesn't really cover it. The EU commission is more or less made of Trumps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And of course the other side NEVER engages in that.
Masnick just publishes a zillion articles against Article 13 because he's passionate about the issue, not because he's being paid by anyone to do so.
eyeroll
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"And of course the other side NEVER engages in that."
It speaks a lot to your honestly and intellect that you're unable to justify or defend these actions, and instead only attempt an extraordinarily weak attempt at deflection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Article 13 might take techdirt out of europe. This will hurt both techdirt and it's readers. And why? Because some people want more money. Why should Mike be paid by someone when he's only talking about censorship.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: “and of course the other side”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: “and of course the other side never engages in that”
He just wants to win folks😁
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The other side is not the FRICKIN' government you dumb shit. The fact that you can't see the difference tells me you are just plain stupid!!!
EYEROLL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And of course the other side NEVER engages in that.
Help me out here. Are you saying that the EU Parliament is on one side of this debate? That would be odd, given that it's supposed to be the neutral legislative body, where the members themselves decide which laws to support and which to reject -- not for the body itself to pay for one side to advocate for the law.
Masnick just publishes a zillion articles against Article 13 because he's passionate about the issue
Well, yeah, that is why I write a bunch of articles about it. And also because I know it will impact lots of the internet I love, including probably Techdirt's ability to function in the EU.
But, either way, that's besides the point. Whether or not I have a viewpoint, I would NEVER expect "CONGRESS" as an entity to promote one of my articles, and would find it problematic if it did. Yes I'm advocating for the position I think is right, and others will advocate for their position. That's fine. But I would never ever expect the legislative body as a whole to endorse one position or the other, before its members have even voted on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Given who you associate with (the people I'm here to track, actually), and against your other claims, you are either extremely disingenuous, or about the lowest-IQ individual on the planet.
While I could dump the results of a multiyear internet investigation in which your name kept turning up, this really isn't the place to have this out. Others seem to have found the bread crumbs anyway, albeit much slowly, and I have a general aversion to duplication of effort. Who YOU are really isn't relevant, but as for your friends? Their future is extremely bleak.
For all I know you might be the one to bring them down. I never draw conclusions. At this point the die is well-cast for certain individuals. Someday the truth will out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh noes, more vague insinuations of 'investigations' and empty mutterings of how any day now 'the truth will out' and terrible things will happen, I'm sure that'll keep Mike awake at night.
Really, do you even take yourself seriously, because I can all but guarantee no-one else does, leaving you nothing but a public laughingstock. Still though, thanks for another laugh, you're at least good for that consistently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Morgan Pietz sinking Prenda Law really pissed in your oatmeal, didn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I agree. You should make a YouTube video, and link to it here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: John Smythe Internet Detective at your service
“multiyear internet investigation”
Has all the impact of a wet fart on a bed of damp moss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Given who you associate with (the people I'm here to track, actually)..."
Because having an opinion which isn't yours is a criminal offense? Or did you just admit to being a creepy sort of stalker?
"While I could dump the results of a multiyear internet investigation in which your name kept turning up..."
So a publication opposed to your particular brand of insanity merits a "multi-year investigation" in your book. Vaguely amusing, Baghdad bob, but it still doesn't trump your previous attempts at comedy.
"...Who YOU are really isn't relevant, but as for your friends? Their future is extremely bleak."
Yes, yes, because we don't share your opinions and call you a liar we're all going to burn in hell...or, according to you, carted off by unnamed agencies murkily associated with law enforcement.
"For all I know you might be the one to bring them down. I never draw conclusions. At this point the die is well-cast for certain individuals. Someday the truth will out."
Again with the assumption that people here are somehow hardened criminals for really not agreeing with you. Gosh.
I'm still not sure what you've been smoking to come up with these thoughts, but seriously, that la-la land of dancing hate-boners you're writing from can't be very good for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Techdirt is big enough to stand up against these bouguiose european dictatorships.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Naturally, it's the biggest copyright thieves that throw their toddler tantrums in support of the directive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Bogus" is slanted language.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or it could simply be a short yet accurate descriptive term. It's not like he didn't link to the other story where the video was shown to be light on facts and heavy on lies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As are you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Hysterically misleading articles."
Masnick NEVER does that LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In my experience, you are correct - there have never been any articles that were hysterically misleading lies on TechDirt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Paul Duffy says hi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Calm yourself bro, you are hysterical.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The EU is out of control
Despite this happening out in the open and most of us seeing it, nobody steps in to do anything. They own the whole system, no one can fairly investigate let alone punish them, they are completely unaccountable. This is no democracy, this is a dictatorship trying its darn best to look like a democracy! Why is no one helping us and doing anything? Are we supposed to flee our countries that we lived our entire lives in? We don't want to become the next Russia or China, they're crazy if they think we will accept that.
The copyright directive is partly intended to set a precedent for mass censorship, normalizing the use of filters to ban content. We already have proof of this: Following closely behind is another law known as terreg, which aims to force websites to use the same filters to censor speech deemed terrorist or hateful, which can encompass anything the state doesn't like. Meanwhile Britain is stepping as low as using laughable excuses like kids watching porn (I kid you not) to criminalize online anonymity and make people show ID to even interact on social media. Some institutions in France and Germany already suggested banning Tor, which may pave the way to criminalizing software including open source programming in the future.
We're hoping that America will step in and not allow the situation to degenerate: It would be crazy for US intelligence to not be on our case or to accept this. What Europe does will affect the US and the rest of the world too: No one will escape an attack on the internet in such an inter-connected world! We're in this together and must all do our part to stop what's happening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The EU is out of control
It really sucks how the world is constantly degrading more and more into chaos. Governments ignoring the will of its people more and more. It feels a lot like a Rapture more than anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The EU is out of control
"It feels a lot like a Rapture more than anything."
Not any more than any of the other crisis situations democracy's been experiencing over the last few centuries.
We don't have a full-on world war complete with concentration camps, use of weapons of mass destruction, the burning of entire continents...
...nor do we have an era of actual slavery followed by excruciating civil wars engulfing continents...
...nor do we have the fall of most of civilization due to invading barbarian hordes.
The truth is that we aren't in such a bad state. We are in a decidedly petty state where, despite the world as a whole being in a relatively good place, we keep seeing governments led by misfit clowns we couldn't trust to organize a drinking game in a pub.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The EU is out of control
No matter how many times we try to make the best of situations like these, it always gets worse. Such a Hard Knock Life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]