EU’s Green Deal target of disinfo ahead of June vote

The EU’s Green Deal has been the target of virulent online disinformation ahead of European parliament elections in June, such as fabricated claims that Brussels plans to introduce a “carbon passport” or ban repairs of cars older than 15 years.

A key project for European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen as she seeks a second term, the Green Deal is an ambitious commitment to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050, making the 27-nation bloc the “first climate-neutral continent”.

But it has come under fire from the fossil fuel industry and the agricultural sector, as well as from the political right and far right.

One of the battlefields is social media, where the far right, climate sceptics and conspiracy theorists are using disinformation to try to delegitimise the deal, said Arnaud Mercier, professor in information and communication sciences at Universite Pantheon-Assas in Paris.

Emboldened by the combined clout of such players, social media users already suspicious of Europe or of climate science feel able to share false or misleading claims “in good faith”, Mercier told AFP.

State actors such as Russia are also seeking to undermine the EU through its green initiative, experts said.

“The Kremlin is actively spreading disinformation narratives relating to the Green Deal,” said Martin Vladimirov, director at the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia, pointing to propaganda “on dangers of wind turbines”.

‘Carbon passport’?

AFP’s fact-check journalists have debunked a number of false or misleading claims related to aspects of the Green Deal in recent months, in areas such as transport, energy, agriculture and biodiversity.

One false claim widely shared in Romanian said Brussels would soon introduce “carbon passports” to measure the carbon emissions of each individual and restrict their travel if they exceeded a predefined limit.

Gianina Serban, from the country’s far-right AUR party, amplified the disinformation by complaining that the EU “seems to be turning into a kind of Soviet commissariat that imposes restrictions”.

She encouraged Romanians to stand against this by voting for “patriots and sovereignists” in the June 6-9 election.

Also getting voters hot under the collar is the issue of their cars.

Determined to drive down dependence on fossil fuels, Brussels wants to phase out the sale of new petrol-driven vehicles by 2035 in favour of electric cars.

This has been seized upon by many as an attack on individual freedoms, with social media users across Europe sharing misleading claims that Brussels wants to ban the repair of vehicles over 15 years old, or even seize and scrap them.

What the European Commission actually proposed in July 2023 was a revision to text on so-called “end-of-life vehicles” in order to better manage their recycling.

Another example involves the EU’s nature restoration law passed by the European Parliament at the end of February. In Sweden, social media users demanded their country exit the EU after false claims that the law would prohibit any farming in protected areas.

‘Re-politicising’ the debate

“A significant portion of ‘fake news’ works via exaggeration and decontextualisation,” Mercier said.

“A complex apparatus such as the European Union, with its multiple layers of authority, stakeholders and lobby groups, is all the more prone” to such techniques, he said.

One method is to present a proposal or measure still moving through the European decision-making process as if it were a concrete law already adopted by the institution.

More broadly, the “political rhetoric consists of not saying exactly” what the real issues are in order to obtain a form of compromise, Mercier said. And that unintentionally fuelled disinformation because it “opens up a space that alternative stories fill.”

Alvaro Oleart, a researcher at Universite Libre de Bruxelles in Brussels, suggested that the discourse of von der Leyen and the backers of the Green Deal was overly “technocratic” and not sufficiently politicised.

“The best way to combat disinformation is not so much to fact-check, but to encourage left-right political debate,” Alvaro said. Re-politicising these issues would expose the winners and losers, Oleart said, making them easier for the electorate to grapple with.