EU to Ban Private Messaging? “Chat Control” Plan Could Enable Mass Surveillance by October

The EU is pushing a controversial “Chat Control” bill that would mandate mass scanning of private chats — including encrypted messages on WhatsApp, Signal, and other secure platforms. It targets encrypted chats. Despite privacy concerns, the bill would force apps to scan for CSAM (child abuse material), even in end-to-end encrypted messages. Denmark is leading the push. The Danish EU presidency aims for a final vote by October 14, 2025 — but many countries are still undecided. Previous attempts failed. Poland, Belgium, and others tried softer versions, but critics warn this draft is even more extreme. Why does this matter? Encryption is at risk. Scanning encrypted chats weakens privacy for everyone — opening doors to mass surveillance. It’s a slippery slope. The EU’s ProtectEU strategy (revealed June 2025) also seeks law enforcement access to encrypted data by 2030. Final negotiations are underway — Denmark needs to convince skeptical EU members. Tech companies & privacy advocates strongly oppose it, warning of unprecedented surveillance. Your private chats could soon be under EU scrutiny.
The rise of the surveillance state
The rise of the surveillance state is becoming increasingly evident, as cameras now monitor individuals walking through public streets and sidewalks in various urban and suburban settings. A simple stroll around the neighbourhood, complete with conversations, can easily be recorded if cities employ surveillance-equipped streetlights. Even front yards are not shielded from surveillance; neighbours with “smart” doorbells can share footage with law enforcement. This intrusion extends beyond city limits, as Automatic License Plate Reader cameras are cropping up along rural highways and county borders, while audio and video surveillance infiltrates remote regions like the Amazon Basin. With advancements in satellite technology, it seems unlikely that any corner of the globe will remain unmonitored in the future. The modern surveillance state wields unprecedented power, and the notion that there is no expectation of privacy in public no longer stands against the vast amounts of data being collected, stored, and analysed.
Despite the looming threats posed by this “Big Brother” phenomenon, critics often find themselves underrepresented in mainstream media. When news outlets do discuss citizen surveillance, they frequently frame it as a necessary solution, while glossing over the potential risks to civil liberties. So, why aren’t more citizens voicing concerns about these invasions of privacy, and in some cases, even endorsing them? One explanation may lie in the way these systems are marketed as protective measures for society, even though they may actually represent the greatest threats to freedom. The tactic of using fear to consolidate power is nothing new, and despite having more access to information than ever, citizens still find themselves susceptible to manipulation.
Each decade has brought its own wave of moral panic, often accompanied by “solutions” that encroach upon civil liberties. The justification for today’s surveillance state traces back to September 11, 2001, when fear stemming from those events led to the acceptance of unconstitutional provisions like The PATRIOT Act, real-time crime centers, and the TSA. The government managed to enforce security measures that would have faced strong resistance under normal circumstances. With the public increasingly accepting surveillance, it became easy to extend these measures from airports to city streets, fueled by sensational stories of gang violence and other societal issues. Additionally, divisive rhetoric surrounding illegal immigration has further driven the expansion of surveillance, normalizing privacy violations and promoting technologies as solutions for non-violent offenses such as littering and traffic infractions. Government programs are also leveraging surveillance to micromanage travelers’ behavior while claiming to protect the environment from climate change. The average citizen is gradually being conditioned to view the surveillance state as a necessary evil, with some even embracing it as a means to feel safer. However, this acceptance comes at a significant cost to civil liberties, making it crucial to recognize the dangers associated with this expanding surveillance apparatus. Authorities are manipulating fear and misinformation to justify the growth of surveillance, and it is vital for citizens to stay informed about these tactics and demand greater transparency and accountability from their governments. The future of civil liberties hinges on this awareness, and addressing these issues is essential before it’s too late.
The swift expansion of the surveillance state is a multifaceted issue, driven by various factors. A primary motivator is the age-old tactic of using fear to consolidate power, which governments and institutions have long employed. By magnifying narratives surrounding crime, terrorism, and other threats, authorities can rationalize the enforcement of security measures that would typically face public backlash. Technologies like surveillance-enabled streetlights and Automatic License Plate Reader cameras are promoted as solutions, but they pose serious risks to civil liberties.
The normalization of privacy violations
The normalization of privacy violations is another key factor in the surveillance state’s growth. As citizens grow accustomed to being constantly watched, they become less likely to challenge the expansion of surveillance. This trend is alarming, as it can result in a significant erosion of civil liberties and a shift toward a more authoritarian society. The government, along with other institutions, is increasingly using surveillance to control citizens’ behavior, which can severely impact individual freedom and autonomy. Furthermore, the use of surveillance to generate revenue raises additional concerns, as it creates a troubling incentive for governments to continue expanding surveillance measures. By enforcing laws and regulations through surveillance, authorities can generate significant income, which is then reinvested into further enhancing surveillance capabilities. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle where the growth of surveillance leads to increased revenue, which subsequently fuels additional surveillance initiatives. The implications of the surveillance state on civil liberties are profound. As citizens become more accustomed to being monitored, they may become less inclined to assert their rights and freedoms. Additionally, the micromanagement of behavior through surveillance can lead to a loss of individual autonomy, forcing citizens to conform to specific norms and expectations. The normalization of privacy violations can also erode trust in institutions and disrupt social cohesion.
Advanced technologies can seriously jeopardize the privacy and safety of its citizens
While many people focus on issues like gangs, littering, and drunk driving, they often miss other important threats that require our attention. A government that employs advanced technologies can seriously jeopardize the privacy and safety of its citizens. Unfortunately, the media frequently overlooks this unprecedented risk, which echoes historical patterns seen around the world. Ignoring this issue could lead to severe repercussions for society. The technologies currently being used in our communities mirror those that oppress citizens in countries like China, where systems like social credit and ethnic cleansing are prevalent. Journalists and political dissidents who expose government corruption often suffer harsh penalties, including being denied basic resources, suitable housing, and the freedom to travel. In more authoritarian regimes, such as Myanmar, governments have used facial recognition technology to hunt down and execute political opponents. Entrusting such significant power to even small governments can be dangerous. Historical abuses, exemplified by practices like civil asset forfeiture, reveal how easily a surveillance state can be misused, often under the guise of judicial protection. Even when artificial intelligence identifies real crimes, the evidence it provides is often unreliable. Another major threat arises from the widespread collection of data without proper consent or oversight. The everyday activities of average Americans are closely monitored and analyzed with minimal regulation, creating vulnerabilities not just from state agents but also from corporations that handle this data. Individuals risk having their personal information exposed due to security breaches, often without ever having shared that information willingly. If someone becomes a target, state actors can compile extensive details about their life while pursuing a crime to charge them with. It’s crucial to have an open conversation about surveillance. Focusing too much on certain fears has eroded personal freedoms, while other valid concerns—especially those related to government intrusion into citizens’ private lives—have largely gone unaddressed.
Partner of Facebook and Google Admits Smartphone Microphones Listen to Conversations
Smartphone Microphones Listen to Conversations before Showing Ads
A Partner of Facebook and Google Admits Smartphone Microphones Listen to Conversations Before Showing Ads. The website 404 Media references a marketing presentation that reveals the use of “Active Listening” software. This technology uses a form of AI to “obtain real-time intent data by listening to conversations.” The presentation was made by Cox Media Group (CMG), a telecom giant that is one of Facebook’s marketing partners. CMG claimed that Amazon, Facebook, and Google are clients using “Active Listening.” However, after the publication on 404 Media, Google removed CMG from its list of partners. Amazon stated that it does not use this technology. Meta (Facebook’s parent company) said it has begun reviewing its relationship with CMG to ensure the group hasn’t violated any terms of service. The capabilities of Cox Media Group to listen in on users became known in December 2023, but without detailed information. Allegedly, the eavesdropping is permitted by the terms of use of certain apps. But in a congressional hearing in 2018, Mark Zuckerberg claimed that they don’t Use Mobile Device Microphones to listen in on users. So Zucks lied.
Surveillance capitalism is turning human beings into raw material
If they are just gathering this information to show me products, it sounds like a nice service! The issue is when it’s weaponized into a system of total control which turns the control into the next source of profits. Surveillance capitalism has its roots in the early days of the internet, when companies like Google and Facebook exploited the “ungoverned spaces” of the digital realm. The dot-com bust, the success of Apple’s consumer-centric approach, and the surveillance-friendly environment created by the US National Security Agency (NSA) and CIA’s investments in the “war on terror” all contributed to the rise of surveillance capitalism.
Surveillance capitalism is a novel economic system that has emerged in the digital era. It is characterized by the unilateral claim of private human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioural data. In this version of capitalism, predicting and influencing behaviour (political and economic) rather than producing goods and services is the primary product. This economic logic prioritizes extracting, processing, and trading personal data to predict and influence human behaviour by exploiting those predictions for various economic (marketing) and political objectives.
In essence, surveillance capitalism is turning human beings into raw material, but our data is extracted. That is the capital of today, big data is the new oil and then it’s used to try to manipulate us.
Surveillance Capitalism Is Powering the Modern Surveillance State
In many cases, surveillance capitalism merges with psywar tools and technologies to power the modern surveillance state, giving rise to a new form of Fascism (public-private partnerships) known as techno-totalitarianism. Leading corporations employing the surveillance capitalism business model include Google, Amazon, and Facebook. Surveillance capitalism has now fused with the science and theory of psychology, marketing, and algorithmic manipulation of online information to give rise to propaganda and censorship capabilities that go far beyond those imagined by the 20th-century predictions of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell.
There is loss of autonomy. Surveillance capitalism erodes individual autonomy as users are manipulated and influenced by algorithms designed to predict and shape their behaviour. It’s a threat to democracy. The concentration of power in the hands of surveillance capitalists undermines democratic processes, as they use their influence to shape public opinion and policy. It also leads to economic inequality: The wealth generated by surveillance capitalism exacerbates economic inequality, as those who own and control the data and algorithms reap the benefits while users are exploited as free commodities.
Covid was meant to normalize biometric surveillance
But it even goes beyond that. Advisor to the WEF, Yuval Noah Harari admitted that Covid was critical because this is what convinces people to accept total biometric surveillance, which will enable the Stalins of the 21st century” to monitor and analyse the brains of all the population, all the time.
In summary, the expansion of the surveillance state is a complex issue influenced by various factors, including the exploitation of fear, the normalization of privacy invasions, and the monetization of surveillance. The consequences for civil liberties are significant, making it imperative to acknowledge the risks associated with this trend. Citizens must remain vigilant, demanding greater transparency and accountability from their governments to safeguard their rights and freedoms. The future of civil liberties depends on this awareness, and it is essential to confront these challenges before it becomes too late.
Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe