In October 2024, the European Commission released a report on digital fairness, part of its ongoing assessment of consumer protection laws within the EU. The report focused on three key pieces of legislation: the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the Consumer Rights Directive, and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive. The findings were concerning: these laws have only partially met their goal of safeguarding consumers, with harmful online practices costing EU consumers a staggering €7.9 billion annually. It highlighted the growing gap between businesses and consumers in the digital world.
Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, reached out to the consumer protection commissioner, Michael McGrath, encouraging him to draft a Digital Fairness Act (DFA). Her message identified five major issues affecting users on apps and online platforms. These included “dark patterns,” designs that manipulate user behavior, addictive platform features, the troubling practices of social media influencers, and convoluted processes for canceling digital subscriptions.
While more recent laws like the UK’s Online Safety Act and the EU’s Digital Services Act have tried to tackle illegal online activities, the DFA aims to address the manipulative tactics used by tech firms that draw in consumers. A 2022 study found that 97% of popular websites and apps used in the EU employed at least one dark pattern, misleading users and undermining informed consent.
The European Consumer Organisation’s survey from September 2023 echoed these concerns, with 60% of respondents feeling that personal data analysis is unfair and 43% believing they lack control over their online experiences. As the DFA moves forward in the proposal stage, civil society groups are actively sharing their insights with the European Commission, pressing for regulations that mitigate the exploitative practices rampant in the tech industry.
Organizations like European Digital Rights (EDRi) are working on position papers advocating for a rights-centered approach in the DFA. They want it to recognize users not merely as consumers but as individuals with broader rights. Itxaso Dominguez, a policy advisor at EDRi, points out the inherent vulnerabilities in the digital space, stemming from power imbalances and information gaps, and believes the DFA should ensure fairness is part of the design and operation of digital services.
Superrr Lab echoes this sentiment, arguing that for the DFA to genuinely promote digital rights, it needs to tackle the underlying issues contributing to power imbalances. Consumers, they insist, deserve opportunities for meaningful participation in the digital landscape.
The addiction inherent in social media design is another pressing issue. There’s growing public concern about its impact on the mental wellbeing of children and young people. Rosie Morgan-Stuart from People Vs Big Tech highlights the need for strong rules to curb tech companies’ attempts to keep users, especially children, online for longer periods.
Enforcement is a key focus of the DFA, particularly in light of the widespread non-compliance among tech firms. Earlier in 2024, the European Commission took action against companies like Meta, Alphabet, and Apple for not adhering to existing regulations under the Digital Markets Act. Urs Buscke from BEUC emphasizes the need for clear, enforceable rules to effectively protect consumers, as current EU laws fall short.
On a broader scale, there is discussion about the DFA’s potential to break up monopolistic practices among Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs), defined as those with over 45 million users in the EU. Advocates like Katarzyna Szymielewicz from the Panoptykon Foundation argue that separating social networks could mitigate addictive designs and intrusive data surveillance while enabling alternatives for content curation.
In January 2025, a group of 18 former EU leaders urged the Commission to consider breaking up powerful companies like Google to foster competition. Claire Godfrey from the Balanced Economy Project cites historical instances of regulatory breakups, arguing that the political will exists to challenge monopolies in the digital space.
The DFA presents a notable opportunity for significant reforms in the digital world. It could set a precedent for fairness, transparency, and accountability, as Itxaso Dominguez suggests. But as Kim Van Spaarentak from GroenLinks reminds us, meaningful change requires ambition. If the EU can commit to ethical design standards, the online realm could transform into a space that fosters community and creativity, raising the all-important question of whether policymakers will have the courage to pursue comprehensive reforms.