The collaboration between Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s new administration has triggered a wave of reactions across European institutions. Universities and public bodies have been quick to announce their departure from X (formerly Twitter), citing concerns over the platform’s increasing alignment with populist and anti-democratic tendencies (Reuters). However, many of these same institutions continue to operate on Instagram, despite Meta’s own track record of undermining democratic values.

Under Mark Zuckerberg’s leadership, Meta has quietly dismantled Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programmes, a move that critics argue paves the way for a resurgence of misinformation across its platforms (The Guardian). If X is being abandoned for its role in promoting misinformation, why is Instagram—or Meta as a whole—exempt from the same scrutiny?

This apparent inconsistency raises fundamental questions about institutional credibility. Is it a genuine, values-driven stance, or a selective approach dictated by convenience? If institutions wish to maintain legitimacy in their digital policies, they must:

• Apply Consistent Standards Across Platforms
  Establish clear, universal criteria for digital engagement that align with institutional values rather than political optics.
• Communicate Transparently
  If an organisation chooses to disengage from certain platforms, it must articulate its rationale clearly, ensuring stakeholders understand the decision-making process.
• Explore Ethical Alternatives
  Institutions should actively support platforms committed to transparency, data protection, and democratic integrity.

The credibility of European institutions is at stake in an era where digital platforms shape public discourse. Inconsistencies in digital policy risk undermining trust, making it crucial to adopt a principled and coherent stance.

A critical question remains: Do you have a crisis protocol in place should Trump’s administration restrict EU access to US-based SaaS platforms?