Why the US media gets the EU so wrong

This week’s fake news about Brussels sanctioning Tucker Carlson illustrates the problem with allowing editors in New York to tell the EU’s story to the world.

Elon Musk tweeted something Wednesday that wasn’t true. I’ll give you a moment to recover from the shock.

This is, of course, nothing new. But what makes this instance notable is that he was repeating something reported by a mainstream American news outlet that most people still think of as reputable (it’s not anymore, but more on that below.) Brian Krassenstein, a self-publishing journalist with 807,000 followers on Musk’s X platform, tweeted Wednesday ahead of Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin: “BREAKING: The European Union is said to be seeking sanctions and a ‘travel ban’ against Tucker Carlson for his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.” That was then quoted-tweeted by Musk (of whom Krassenstein seems to be a big fan), who said, “If true, this would be disturbing indeed. One may agree with Tucker or not, but he is a major American journalist and such an action would greatly offend the American public.”

Though he didn’t cite or link to it in his tweet, Krassenstein was obliquely referring to an article published on the Newsweek website Wednesday titled: “Exclusive: Tucker Carlson Could Face Sanctions Over Putin Interview” (he linked to it later in a subsequent tweet). The word “could” is doing a lot of work there, given that the source for this bombshell was the opinion of one member of the 702-seat European Parliament, which has absolutely no say over EU sanctions (backed up by two former MEPs also expressing their opinion). The premise of the article is, at best, misleading. They never asked the actual body responsible for sanctions, the EU’s foreign policy arm the European External Action Service (EEAS). If they had, they would have been told that the idea of sanctioning Tucker Carlson has never been discussed or even suggested. The MEP in question, though an oft-quoted darling of the UK media because he’s been outspoken on Brexit, has no power and is these days not taken very seriously in Brussels.

The article blew up after Musk tweeted the fake news to his 172 million followers. The alt right gleefully amplified a story that feeds into their self-styled persecution narrative. The EEAS, part of the European Commission, was asked about it and said: “No, there is no such proposal nor discussion in the relevant EU bodies regarding this person.” The Commission then presumably contacted Newsweek to tell them the actual facts. The article was then nearly doubled in length with further ‘detail’, and now reads: “members of the Parliament do not have the power to impose sanctions…for an individual to be added to the EU's sanctions list, evidence can be presented to the EEAS for review. If deemed sufficient, the EEAS can then present the case to the European Council.” These paragraphs have been added deep down into the article (past several rounds of ads). A note has been added to the bottom saying “This article has been updated to include…additional context on the EU's sanctions process.” Additional context that invalidates the entire premise of the article. But it’s too late, the damage has been done. Neither Musk nor Krassenstein have tweeted to say they were misled by Newsweek. The idea that the EU considered sanctioning Carlson will live on forever, used to justify the right’s persecution complex and paint the EU as an Orwellian suppressor of free speech.

It's worth examining why this happened, because it happens a lot with American media. None of the US broadcast networks have a correspondent in Brussels and only two newspapers do (excluding business media). This results in frequent misreporting of developments here, most often involving misunderstandings of how the EU works and which institutions have power where. Sometimes these misunderstandings are genuine confusion, but often they are wilful distortions. Ask yourself: would Newsweek have made this ‘error’ if we switched the context to the US government? If Newsweek talked to one congressman in US House of Representatives who said he wants sanctions against Carlson, would they report that as “the US is seeking sanctions against Carlson”? Of course not. And it’s not just because the editors in New York know how the US government works but they don’t know how the EU works. It’s because they know that their readers also know how the US works but don’t know how the EU works. Newsweek’s readers wouldn’t take seriously an article that claimed “the US is seeking to Y” by citing only a congressman saying he wants Y. The editors know they can’t get away with that, they would have to hear it from the state department or at least an anonymous source who’s involved in such decisions. But because people don’t understand the basic details of how the EU works, they know they can get away with inaccuracies, exaggerations and outright lies when it comes to Europe.

Whether they were honestly confused about who makes decisions on sanctions is beside the point. The point is that they don’t care, and they know they can get away with sexing up their thinly-sourced article because their readers don’t know the difference. Unfortunately, this happens constantly in both US and UK media. There are countless examples, as I outline below.