EU Tackles Disinformation: From Voluntary Code to DSA Cornerstone
The European Commission has formally integrated its voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation into the Digital Services Act (DSA), marking a significant shift in its strategy to combat online disinformation. This integration elevates the Code from a voluntary agreement to a key benchmark for compliance under the DSA, holding very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs) accountable for mitigating systemic risks, including the spread of disinformation. This move, effective July 1st, 2023, empowers the Commission to take enforcement actions against non-compliant platforms.
The Code: Providing Structure and Guidance Amidst DSA Ambiguity
The Code’s integration addresses a critical gap in the DSA: the lack of clear definition of "systemic risk." While the DSA mandates risk assessments and audits by VLOPs and VLOSEs, it offers little guidance on identifying these risks. The Code fills this void by providing a structured framework with detailed technical guidance, including specific quantitative and qualitative Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), for platforms to implement. Experts believe this framework offers a more concrete approach to mitigating disinformation than the DSA alone. Importantly, the Code and the DSA focus on mitigating platform-driven disinformation risks rather than mandating content removal, aiming to strike a balance between combating disinformation and protecting free expression.
Rollback and Concerns: A Test of the Code’s Strength
Despite initial broad support from major tech companies, the Code has faced recent setbacks with prominent platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Google, and Microsoft significantly reducing their commitments or withdrawing entirely. A report by Democracy Reporting International (DRI) highlighted a 31% decrease in committed measures between 2022 and 2025. These withdrawals raise concerns about the Code’s long-term viability and effectiveness. For example, Microsoft and Google fully withdrew from fact-checking measures, while other platforms scaled back their commitments to political advertising transparency. These developments underscore the challenges of enforcing a voluntary code and the potential limitations of its integration into the DSA.
Challenges to Implementation: Audits, Resources, and Bureaucracy
Effective compliance assessment is crucial for the DSA’s success, and audits play a vital role. However, the DSA provides considerable leeway for platforms to set their own benchmarks for auditors, and the lack of Commission guidance raises concerns about the quality and consistency of these audits. Experts emphasize the need for expert auditors with a deep understanding of disinformation and platform systems to ensure independent and critical judgment. Furthermore, the lack of funding for civil society organizations tasked with platform monitoring creates a resource asymmetry that favors platforms, many of whom have a history of resisting regulation. This asymmetry raises doubts about the feasibility of robust and independent oversight of platform compliance.
Transatlantic Tensions and the Future of EU Regulation
The EU’s assertive regulatory stance has created transatlantic tensions, with the US closely scrutinizing the DSA’s impact. Some experts worry that political pressure from the US could undermine the EU’s resolve. The recent withdrawal of Meta from fact-checking partnerships in the US, while maintaining some commitments within the EU, highlights this dynamic. This move has particularly negative implications for EU candidate countries like Moldova and Ukraine, which rely heavily on the Code for combating disinformation.
A Pivotal Moment: Enforcement and International Implications
The integration of the Code into the DSA marks a pivotal moment in the fight against online disinformation. While the Code provides a more concrete framework than the DSA alone, its effectiveness hinges on robust enforcement, independent audits, and adequate resources for oversight. The ongoing withdrawal of major platforms from key commitments underscores the challenges ahead and the need for the Commission to demonstrate its commitment to upholding the DSA’s principles. The international implications of the DSA, particularly in relation to transatlantic relations and the impact on countries outside the EU, will continue to be a key area of focus. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether the Code’s integration into the DSA truly strengthens the fight against disinformation or proves to be a regulatory sleight of hand.