What are you looking for?

Live

Misinformation

A question of consent: Meta, ads, and the EU’s fight for digital rights

Meta is under fire from the EU. The heart of the debate? The true value of our consent — and who gets to define it.

4 min read · 9 Sep 2025

Michalina Szpyrka ·

While digital sovereignty and data privacy dominate political debate in Europe, the European Commission is ramping up pressure on Big Tech. Meta—the company behind Facebook and Instagram—is now facing a formal EU investigation over whether its ad model violates the Digital Markets Act (DMA).

Meta claims it has changed its system to comply with the law. But according to the Commission, those changes are merely cosmetic. Beneath the legal arguments lies a deeper battle over what counts as “real” consent in the world of digital platforms.

Pay or be tracked? Meta’s controversial new choice

Since November 2024, Meta has offered European users a binary option:

Pay a monthly subscription for an ad-free experience, or
Use the platform for free — but agree to ad tracking and data profiling.

This “pay or be tracked” model quickly caught the Commission’s attention. Officials argued that such a choice contradicts the DMA’s core aim: ensuring that users give freely given, informed, and meaningful consent.

In April 2025, the Commission fined Meta €200 million, declaring that the choice was “illusory” and that users were being economically pressured into giving up their personal data just to access basic services.

In response, Meta lowered the subscription price by 40%, down to €7.99 per month. It also tweaked its consent forms and the wording used when users are asked to choose between options. However, the company hasn’t disclosed full details of these changes.

Not good enough? The EU might hit Meta again

Meta was given until 27 June 2025 to fully comply with the Commission’s ruling. But during a press briefing, Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier refused to confirm whether the changes met the required standards.

He added that daily penalties could be introduced starting 28 June if Meta doesn’t meet the compliance threshold.

This is not the first time Brussels has taken action against the “consent or pay” model. Under the DMA, platforms labeled as gatekeepers — meaning they hold a dominant market position — must provide users with a genuine alternative.

The key requirement? That users give explicit, unpressured consent for their personal data to be used for advertising purposes. No hidden strings. No economic blackmail.

Meta pushes back: "This is discrimination"

Meta isn’t backing down. The company argues that its subscription model is legitimate and should be allowed under the same rules as any other business in Europe.

In a public statement, Meta accused the Commission of changing the rules mid-game and of targeting its business model simply because it’s based in the US.

Still, Meta insists it is cooperating constructively and making good-faith efforts to adapt to evolving EU demands.

Less personalized ads — but is that enough?

One of Meta’s compromises is to make ads in the free version less personalized, even for users who don’t pay. But critics say this doesn’t solve the real issue.

Even limited profiling still involves personal data — and the question remains: Can users truly give free consent when their access to a major social platform depends on it?

The DMA was designed to do more than just police ad practices. It aims to rebalance power in the digital economy — ensuring fair competition and protecting users’ rights, not just profits.

A user should be able to use a service without being forced to pay with their data.

DMA on trial: a major test for EU digital policy

The case against Meta is one of the first big tests for the DMA, which took full effect in March 2024. The regulation doesn’t ban targeted ads outright — but it does require clear and informed consent before companies can use personal data commercially.

And the Commission’s opponent is no small fish. Meta has vast legal and technical resources, and any EU decision could be challenged in court, all the way up to the European Court of Justice.

But the outcome matters far beyond one company. It could set a precedent for how user data can be monetized across Europe.

Europe’s digital rules vs. Silicon Valley’s business models

At the core of the dispute is a clash of digital cultures. Meta argues that Europe’s strict rules stifle innovation and unfairly penalize non-European companies.

Meanwhile, EU regulators stress that privacy cannot be optional. Consent must be real — not a clever checkbox, not an “accept or pay” trap.

Meta may still appeal the Commission’s decisions — but it now faces the risk of new fines that could be applied daily.

This battle over consent is more than a regulatory dispute. It may end up shaping the future of online business models — and our rights as digital citizens — in the years to come.

Written by

Michalina Szpyrka

0 Follower · 10 Followers

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article