Meta Under Fire for Suspected Lack of Compliance with the EU's Digital Services Act

Introduction

On 30 April 2024, the European Commission opened formal proceedings to assess whether Facebook’s parent company Meta have breached the Digital Services Act (DSA). The suspected infringements centre on Meta’s policies regarding political content on its platforms. The proceedings are of particular concern to EU leaders in light of the uncertainty surrounding upcoming European Parliament elections and fears of content funded by the Kremlin.

What are the proceedings focused on?

The Commission outlined that the investigation will focus on several different areas.

First, the Commission suspects that Meta is not complying with DSA obligations governing the dissemination of ‘fake news’ campaigns. The potential for deceptive advertisements and disinformation presents a risk to fundamental electoral processes and rights.

Second, the proceedings will consider the visibility of political content on Meta’s platforms. This is in response to suspicions that Meta’s current system demotes political content in Facebook and Instagram’s algorithms – a practice that is not compliant with the DSA’s transparency and user redress obligations.

 

Meta has defended their strategy, describing it as a measure taken to mitigate the risk of user-generated content on sensitive topics. However, the Commission demands greater transparency from the company as to how these decisions are made.

Third, the Commission is concerned by Meta’s deprecation of the tool ‘CrowdTangle’, which enables real-time election monitoring by researchers and journalists. The Commission’s Guidelines have encouraged the expansion of tools such as ‘CrowdTangle’ during election seasons rather than curtailing them. Thus, the Commission believes Meta has failed to diligently assess and adequately mitigate risks related to its platforms’ effect on public discourse.

Finally, the Commission suspects that Meta’s notice and action mechanism – which allows users to flag the presence of illegal content – is neither user-friendly nor easy to access. Additionally, the Commission is investigating suspicions that Meta has not implemented a system to lodge complaints against decisions made about content moderation.

What are the next steps?

The Commission will gather further evidence by requesting information from Meta or conducting interviews and inspections. They also have the power to take additional enforcement steps such as interim measures and non-compliance decisions.

 

There is no legal deadline set by the DSA for bringing formal proceedings to an end. The duration of the investigation will depend on several factors such as the complexity of the case, the extent of Meta’s cooperation and the exercise of the rights of defence. An EU official said the Commission expects Meta to cooperate, having already had some constructive conversations and that “It is in nobody’s interest that the website is exploited by Russian actors”.

 

The Commission has also confirmed that the opening of formal proceedings is without prejudice to enforcement actions under other regulatory frameworks by other authorities, meaning it may decide to initiate on any other conduct that may constitute an infringement under the DSA.

conclusion

At a NATO panel in February, officials said they were treating disinformation ‘as potent a weapon as bullets and missiles’ and it is clear Meta has a significant part to play in rooting out fake news and propaganda before it can have a dangerous impact on political outcomes. The Commission will certainly be hoping their proceedings can do so.

 

 

By Molly McCreary