Meta Faces EU Antitrust Probe Over Alleged Breach of Advertising Model and Data Consent Rules

Brussels, Brussels-Capital Region, Belgium Belgium
Meta argues that it offers an 'alternative' version of its service but EC wants users entitled to less personalized ads.
Meta could face a fine of up to 10% of its global annual revenue under the DMA if findings are confirmed.
Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is under investigation by the European Commission (EC) for allegedly breaching antitrust rules over its advertising model.
The Digital Markets Act (DMA) requires dominant online platforms to give users more choice and rivals more opportunities to compete.
The EC has found that Meta's 'pay or consent' model forces users to consent to personal data use for ads without providing an equivalent ad-free version.
Meta Faces EU Antitrust Probe Over Alleged Breach of Advertising Model and Data Consent Rules

Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is under investigation by the European Commission (EC) for allegedly breaching antitrust rules over its advertising model. The model, known as 'pay or consent,' allows European users to pay a monthly fee for ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram or accept versions with personalized ads. However, the EC has found that this binary choice forces users to consent to the use of their personal data for advertising and fails to provide them with a less personalized but equivalent version of Meta's social networks.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA), which came into force in March 2023, requires dominant online platforms to give users more choice and rivals more opportunities to compete. Meta was also forced to add safety features to its misinformation tracking tool CrowdTangle for use during European Parliament elections.

If the provisional findings of the Commission's investigation are confirmed, Meta could face a fine equivalent to 10% of its global annual revenue under the DMA. Based on the company's 2023 results, that would amount to $13.5 billion.

Meta has previously pointed to a ruling from the European Court of Justice last year that allows a company to offer an 'alternative' version of its service that does not rely on data collection for ads as justification for introducing the subscription offer. However, the EC argues that users should still be entitled to get access to an equivalent service which uses less of their personal data, in this case for the personalization of advertising.

The EU announcement comes a week after it accused Apple of breaching the DMA by preventing app developers from freely directing consumers to cheaper services. The regulators are also investigating Google parent Alphabet under the new law.

Meta said it doesn't accept the Commission's findings and looks forward to further constructive dialogue with the European Commission to bring this investigation to a close.



Confidence

91%

Doubts
  • Is the EC's interpretation of the DMA correct?
  • Will Meta be able to provide evidence that users have a real choice in ad-free versions?

Sources

88%

  • Unique Points
    • Meta has been accused of breaking Europe’s new digital competition rules over its ‘pay or consent’ advertising model.
    • , Meta launched a service called ‘Subscription for no ads’, allowing European users of Facebook and Instagram to pay up to €12.99 ($14) a month for ad-free versions or accept versions with personalized ads.
    • , The European Commission said in a statement that, in its preliminary view, this binary choice forces users to consent to the (use) of their personal data and fails to provide them a less personalized but equivalent version of Meta’s social networks.
    • , If the provisional findings of the Commission’s investigation are confirmed, the EU could hit Meta with a fine equivalent to 10% of its global annual revenue under its landmark Digital Markets Act.
    • , Based on the company’s 2023 results, that would amount to $13.5 billion.
    • , Meta said it didn’t accept the Commission’s findings.
  • Accuracy
    • Users pay a monthly fee for an ad-free version of Facebook or Instagram that does not use their personal data for advertising purposes.
    • The European Commission found the model forces users to consent to the combination of their personal data from multiple platforms and does not provide a less personalised but equivalent version of Meta’s social networks.
    • Meta could face fines as high as $13.4 billion if found in breach of the EU’s Digital Markets Act.
  • Deception (50%)
    The article accuses Meta of breaking European law with its 'pay or consent' model without disclosing the specifics of the accusation. It states that Meta's Subscription for no ads service violates Europe's new digital competition rules by forcing users to either pay for an ad-free version or accept personalized ads, thus not providing a less personalized alternative. This is an example of selective reporting as it only presents one side of the argument and omits Meta's response that their service complies with the Digital Markets Act. The article also implies that Meta has been accumulating personal data of millions of EU citizens over the years, which could mislead readers into thinking this is a new or unlawful practice by Meta.
    • Meta said it didn't accept the Commission's findings.
    • The European Commission said in a statement Monday...
    • Facebook parent Meta has been accused...
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

98%

  • Unique Points
    • The European Commission has accused Meta of breaching the EU’s new digital laws with an advertising model that charges users for ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram.
    • Users pay a monthly fee for an ad-free version of Facebook or Instagram that does not use their personal data for advertising purposes.
    • Meta must launch ‘equivalent’ versions of Facebook and Instagram that use less personal data to comply with the DMA.
  • Accuracy
    • Meta launched a ‘pay or consent’ model last year to comply with the EU’s data privacy rules.
    • If users do not pay, their data is used to tailor personalised adverts that appear in their social media feeds.
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

95%

  • Unique Points
    • Meta is under investigation by EU regulators for allegedly breaching antitrust rules over its ad-supported subscription service.
    • 'Subscription for no ads' allows European users of Facebook and Instagram to pay up to €12.99 ($14) a month for ad-free versions or accept versions with personalized ads.
    • 'pay or consent' model forces users to consent to the use of their personal data for advertising and fails to provide them a less personalized but equivalent version of Meta's social networks.
    • Meta could face fines as high as $13.4 billion if found in breach of the EU’s Digital Markets Act.
  • Accuracy
    • Meta introduced the new model in response to a ruling from the European Court of Justice last year that allows a company to offer an ‘alternative’ version of its service that does not rely on data collection for ads.
    • Meta could face fines as high as $13.4 billion if found in breach of the EU’s Digital Markets Act, which aims to clamp down on anti-competitive practices from large digital companies.
    • Users pay a monthly fee for an ad-free version of Facebook or Instagram that does not use their personal data for advertising purposes.
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains a few informal fallacies and an example of inflammatory rhetoric. It also uses direct quotes from the EU regulators without analyzing or contextualizing them.
    • Investors are staying on the sidelines amid a broad selloff in tech stocks this year. Shares of Facebook parent Meta are down more than 30% this year amid a troubling macro environment and weaker-than-expected results.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

85%

  • Unique Points
    • Meta offers users a choice between being targeted by ads based on their personal data or paying to avoid them.
    • , Meta fails to provide users a less personalised but equivalent version of its social networks.
    • Meta was forced to add safety features to its misinformation tracking tool CrowdTangle for use during European Parliament elections.
  • Accuracy
    • The European Commission has charged Meta with breaching the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) via its new ‘pay or consent’ advertising model.
    • The EC found that Meta fails to provide users a less personalised but equivalent version of the social networks.
  • Deception (50%)
    The article by Al Jazeera makes several deceptive statements. Firstly, the author states that 'Meta offers users a choice between being targeted by ads based on their personal data or paying to avoid them.' This is a lie by omission as it fails to mention that users cannot opt-out of having their data collected for advertising purposes even if they choose to pay for the no-ads subscription. Secondly, the author states that 'However, the EC found in a preliminary investigation that Meta fails to provide them a less personalised but equivalent version of the social networks.' This is selective reporting as it only mentions Meta's failure to provide an equivalent version without mentioning that the EC also found that Meta complies with other aspects of the DMA. Lastly, the author states that 'Privacy activists and privacy watchdogs have also taken issue with Meta’s advertising model.' This is editorializing as it implies a negative stance towards Meta's advertising model without providing any evidence or context.
    • Privacy activists and privacy watchdogs have also taken issue with Meta’s advertising model.
    • Meta offers users a choice between being targeted by ads based on their personal data or paying to avoid them.
    • However, the EC found in a preliminary investigation that Meta fails to provide them a less personalised but equivalent version of the social networks.
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains a few informal fallacies and appeals to authority. It also uses inflammatory rhetoric by referring to 'Big Tech' and the EU's actions as 'the latest hit on big tech' and 'latest in a series of EC actions targeting Big Tech'. The author also presents dichotomous depictions by stating that Meta offers users a choice between being targeted by ads or paying to avoid them, implying there are no other options. Additionally, the author mentions the potential fine for DMA violations without providing context on how this decision was made.
    • . . .the tech giant’s launch of the no-ads subscription service for Facebook and Instagram in Europe last November.
    • The charge against Meta is the latest in a series of EC actions targeting Big Tech, a trend that has accelerated since the DMA came into force in March.
    • In September 2023, the EU named 22 so-called “gatekeeper” services run by Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft and TikTok-owner ByteDance, giving them six months to comply with the DMA provisions.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication