Meta and Twitter have so far resisted calls by EU and US lawmakers to remove Russian embassy accounts that spread misinformation but have taken down some posts
Facebook resists calls from EU and US for bigger crackdown on Kremlin-directed misinformation Tweets: @vjmallet , @javierespft , @betterknowyou , @javierespft , and @javierespft Tweets: Victor Mallet / @vjmallet : There are implications here for Chinese embassy accounts too, as the internet continues to split into two separate worlds after an onslaught of fake news from authoritarian governments: Propaganda spread by Russian embassy accounts puts Big Tech in bind https://www.ft.com/... Javier Espinoza / @javierespft : @MsHannahMurphy Western lawmakers have demanded that social media companies crack down on Russian state accounts, including the dozens of embassies, government ministries and political leaders that are part of the Kremlin propaganda machine. @betterknowyou : Propaganda spread by Russian embassy accounts puts Big Tech in bind: Facebook resists calls from EU and US for bigger crackdown on Kremlin-directed misinformation https://www.ft.com/... Javier Espinoza / @javierespft : @MsHannahMurphy EU regulators are now mulling ways to strengthen the upcoming Digital Services Act, aimed at increasing responsibility of large platforms when it comes to policing the internet. Javier Espinoza / @javierespft : @MsHannahMurphy “The Kremlin has weaponised information,” Vera Jourova, the European Commission vice-president for values and transparency, told the Financial Times.
Context & Ripple Effects
The platforms are caught between two governments' demands. Days after the invasion, Nick Clegg said Meta had refused a Russian order to stop fact-checking and labeling state media content on Facebook, while Russia's own providers restricted access to Twitter and Facebook at home. Now Western lawmakers want the opposite of restraint: removal of Russian embassy accounts outright.
Meta and Twitter have instead taken a middle path — they removed posts by Russia's London embassy denying the Mariupol hospital bombing but kept the accounts live. That compromise is exactly what EU regulators are targeting as they consider strengthening the Digital Services Act, with Vera Jourova framing the issue as the Kremlin having 'weaponised information.'
First-order effects
- EU and US lawmakers pressing for full account removal get only partial compliance: individual posts come down, but Russian embassy and ministry accounts stay up on both platforms.
- Russian diplomatic messaging loses its least-moderated venues incrementally — each takedown narrows what embassies can publish directly on Facebook and Twitter.
Second-order effects
- Regulators respond to the platforms' reluctance by moving to harden the Digital Services Act, shifting enforcement from voluntary moderation toward legal obligations on state-affiliated accounts.
- As direct embassy posting gets riskier, propaganda migrates to less policed formats — researchers already documented Russia shifting into news-site comment sections when social networks clamped down.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds, state information operations and platform policy enter an escalating loop: each crackdown pushes Kremlin messaging into new channels, and each evasion justifies broader platform liability — with the EU study already finding that Kremlin-backed accounts' reach and influence grew despite the post-2022 crackdowns.
- The standoff accelerates a split internet: Russia restricts Western platforms domestically while Western regulators tighten rules on Russian state content, leaving Chinese embassy accounts facing the same dilemma next.
The trend: State disinformation is pushing governments and platforms toward codified legal liability for foreign state accounts, replacing case-by-case moderation with structural rules like a strengthened Digital Services Act.