We initiated summary proceedings against Meta. We're demanding that Meta offer users of Instagram and Facebook the option to choose a feed that is not based on profiling. In a statement of support, Centre for Democracy & Technology (CDT) Europe highlights how civil society can and needs to hold Big Tech to account.

What is the case about?

Bits of Freedom is suing MetaMore on the case  for violating the Digital Services Act (DSA). This law is intended to give back control and autonomy to users of online platforms. Among others, by giving them more control over their feed.

When determining what content users see, dominant platforms prioritize their own interests, namely the selling of ads on the basis of the interests and behavior of users. They try to keep users glued to the screen by showing them more and more extreme information. That is why the timeline based on user profiles is set as the default.

Luckily, users have the right to an alternative to this profiling feed. Such as a timeline showing only the content of people and organizations they follow, in chronological order. The problem? Meta does not allow users the option to set this feed as their preference. In addition, Meta makes it unnecessarily difficult to find and use it. This is in violation of the DSA.

Why is this relevant?

We know Big Tech won't voluntarily change its ways. In order for the law to have real-world impact, civil society's involvement is paramount. As Asha Allen, Secretary General of CDT Europe, explains:

"In recent years, CDT Europe has advocated for a high standard of fundamental rights protections in the development and enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA). To that end, we have set up the DSA Civil Society Coordination Group, which consists of recognised not-for-profit organisations, experts and public-interest technologists that share our goal. [...] Organisations such as Bits of Freedom who consistently advocate in the public interest are integral to increasing transparency, accountability and public scrutiny."

What's next?

The hearing is scheduled for September 22, 2025. The case is supported by Amnesty International, AI Forensics, Article 19, the Dutch consumer association Consumentenbond, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and EU Disinfo Lab, among others.