Abstract Disinformation has become a contentious issue within the European Union (EU) and in transatlantic relations, raising fundamental questions about how democratic societies should regulate online content. This article investigates how competing democratic visions shape European Parliamentary debates on the Digital Services Act (DSA). Through a framing analysis of plenary debates, it identifies four visions articulated by Members of the European Parliament: Deliberative, Classical Liberal, Pluralist and Populist. Each constructs a distinct threat profile of ‘disinformation’ and advances a corresponding regulatory stance – from support for content moderation to outright rejection of the DSA. Whilst previous research suggests a broad European consensus on disinformation as a democratic threat, this study reveals deep normative divides over its meaning and governance. These findings complicate claims of a simple EU–US divide in digital governance by showing that normative cleavages cut across political systems. By linking parliamentary framings to democratic theory, the article offers a framework for understanding how divergent democratic ideals shape EU regulation.
Wahlberg et al. (Tue,) studied this question.