Of course, this process is framed in the gentle, unimpeachable language of harm reduction: “digital safety,” “combating hate speech,” and “preventing online radicalization.” The DSA’s risk-assessment mandates and enforcement mechanisms encourage over-compliance, leading to collateral censorship of lawful but controversial or unpopular speech. These are intentionally vague terms of course, as speech that has a “negative impact on public discourse” can literally be anything the establishment doesn’t like. It is also striking that there are laws banning media to begin with, even if said media is propaganda by another country. Germany presents perhaps the starkest illustration of how speech laws can escalate from abstract regulation to home invasions.