There is nothing authoritarian about dispelling myths. These were not about opinions, they concerned literally false claims about EU directives and regulations.

Selectively taking incorrect statements from one side is a way of technically being truthful while pushing one sided information, i.e. it's propaganda.

At least be fair about it. It's counter propaganda.

The garbage thrown about by those British publications is propaganda. Day in, day out, from many-many more publications, not just a puny web page.

"The website, which offers officials in Brussels a chance to rebut media accusations of meddling, features hundreds of reports that are based on inaccurate or misleading information."

So it was made for officials to rebut lies printed in the media about the EU.

I take it that you don't mind "journalists" printing lies as long as they're lies that support your point of view?

Shouldn't the website also list factual reports proving their point that EU is over-regulated?

No matter how many reports got wrong, they don't hurt the reports are factual and correct.

Nope. Why would they?

They're refuting British lies.

Lol. EU doesn't have NGO can do this? The government has to be the one to run the Truth department?

Every large institution rectifies blatant misrepresentations about themselves in press conferences, including all governments of the world and all companies. It's weird to assume they shouldn't.

If it would be EU sponsored NGO doing this, you would argue it's a department of truth proxy wouldn't you?

Of course. I assume there are concerned citizens in the EU can do this. Why does the government need to get involved in this?

You're being silly. To take an extreme scenario, if the KGB is financing entities spouting non-sense in various publications, you expect the US/CIA to just take it lying down? :-)

It's part of intelligence/counter-intelligence, you have to control the narrative because the average citizen isn't well informed enough and will just end up believing what the other party tells them... because they're the only ones saying anything.

Private individuals can do this, but governments have been doing this too, since the beginning of time (and of governments).

So the Brexit to EU is like KGB to US? Why do you want to keep UK inside EU then?

I'm not keeping anything, anywhere. The UK can do whatever it wants, as far as I care.

I was just doing a reductio ad abusrdum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum) to show you that your logic was faulty.

You didn't. I proved your RU-US example did not fit in the context of UK-EU.

You proved how? Why would the EU not be allowed to publish things proving that what the UK newspaper articles are false?

Is there some sort of legal principle I'm missing that says that government entities are not allowed to defend themselves from lies?

I don't see a difference in paying the salary of people to do it in your name, or funding a NGO and indirectly paying the salary of the people who do the work.

The difference is whether the government gets involved.

This was just a blog as part of regular press work by the European Commission in the UK. Every organization does that in publications and press conferences. It's normal to publish press releases to correct misunderstandings or point out the view of your organization/company. The UK government does the very same, for instance.

But what exactly is authoritarian about this? It's not like this is the only truth?

> No matter how you disprove the selected "euromyths". This action itself just directly prove the broader point: EU has an overarching government.

The EU can only do what its member state government delegate to it, and the same EU also has a fraction of the employees a regular state government has. France has about 65 million citizens and about 2 million state employees.

The entire EU has something like 50k employees, for the whole group of 450 million people.