In the Fitness Check conducted in 2024, the European Commission found that current EU consumer law offers inadequate protection for consumers online. The Chamber of Labour has long emphasized that digital spaces should follow the same fairness standards as offline environments. The EU Commission aims to specifically curb problematic online practices such as dark patterns, influencer marketing, unfair personalisation practices and addictive design through the Digital Fairness Act (DFA). According to the Commission’s work programme, the DFA is scheduled to be tabled in the fourth quarter of 2026.

To commence the event, Laura Wiesböck, Senior Researcher at the Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS), presented the ADDICT study, commissioned by the Vienna Chamber of Labour (AK Vienna), which examines design that encourages addiction. Afterwards, she joined a discussion with Maria-Myrto Kanellopoulou (Head of Unit for Consumer Law at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers), Kim Van Sparrentak (MEP, The Greens), Urs Buscke (Senior Legal Officer at BEUC) and Louise Beltzung (Consumer Policy Officer at AK Vienna), moderated by Itxaso Domínguez de Olazábal (Policy Advisor at EDRi). The discussion attracted considerable interest, particularly due to the the ongoing proceedings initiated by the Commission against TikTok. The Commission has tentatively determined that the platform's efforts to address addictive design are insufficient.

Study on addictive design on Instagram and TikTok

The excessive, even addiction-like, use of social media is a public health issue for users of all ages – this was the starting point for the study on addictive design commissioned by AK Vienna and conducted by Laura Wiesböck (et al.). It affects mental and physical health: from symptoms of depression, ADHD and anxiety, through to sleep and concentration problems, and chronic headaches and postural issues.

Despite the fact that these consequences have been well researched, many proposed solutions focus on individual behaviour, for example through recommendations such as ‘digital detox’. By contrast, the study focuses on the underlying business models and design practices that are systematically aimed at encouraging compulsive behaviour among users.

Following a comprehensive review of existing literature, the research team formulated a taxonomy consisting of 55 questions regarding the addictive potential of social media platforms. These questions were evaluated using a traffic-light classification system. These include, for example, infinite scrolling, the automatic playback of videos (‘autoplay’) and push notifications that create a false sense of urgency. Using this questionnaire, the researchers conducted a case study on Instagram and TikTok. The result: at least 40 addiction-promoting design elements can be found on each platform.

Between innovation and manipulation – A discussion on digital fairness

Maria-Myrto Kanellopoulou welcomed the study and emphasised the importance of up-to-date data for the Digital Fairness Act (DFA) currently under development. She noted that the DFA’s goal is to eliminate legal loopholes and empower users with more control. Bans should generally be avoided, except potentially for minors. Similar to her fellow panelists, she highlighted that the DFA should safeguard both minors and adults. Maria-Myrto Kanellopoulou also pointed out that, according to the Digital Fairness Fitness Check report, unfair business practices cost consumers at least €7.9 billion annually, but that they also cause non-material harm, such as mental health issues generated by addictive design.

Kim Van Sparrentak urged that the DFA should not be presented as a major new set of regulations, but rather as an update to consumer protection – as adjustments to existing rules usually meet with less resistance than entirely new laws. In any case, the Digital Services Act (DSA) would not be sufficient. Whilst most products in the EU are subject to strict safety requirements, digital services often do not require proof of safety – even though the risks to health are well documented. These include a reduced attention span, impaired emotional regulation and even changes to the brain’s grey matter, which is responsible for central cognitive processes such as thinking, learning, and memory.

Louise Beltzung emphasised that concrete changes are possible. She argued that platforms – unlike nicotine, for example – are not inherently addictive. They could also retain users through high-quality content. Certain addictive aspects of design need to be prohibited, while users should have the option to turn off other features. Things get more complicated when it comes to algorithmic personalization – people who watch a video often end up seeing mostly similar content afterwards. While this should not be rejected outright, trends such as ‘hack the algorithm’ show that users have little control over their feeds: given the proven risks, this is unacceptable.

Urs Buscke also called for greater clarity: the DFA, as a horizontal instrument, must cover all relevant areas, not just social media. Today, addictive design can also be found in video games, online marketplaces, streaming services and chatbots. He too advocated for a combination of bans and choices for users. Ultimately, consumer protection is about safeguarding decision-making autonomy – an autonomy that is deliberately undermined by addictive design.

In addition to the findings of the study presented, Laura Wiesböck pointed out that other platforms, such as marketplaces, dating platforms and career networks, also employ addictive design elements. As well as the health risks associated with the attention economy, its impact on democratic structures should not be underestimated. Algorithms often favour extreme, radical content that runs counter to fundamental democratic principles. For instance, the University of Potsdam showed that in the run-up to state elections in eastern Germany, AfD content was seen far more frequently in young people’s feeds than content from other parties.

Further links

IHS: ADDICT - Addictive Design in Digital Consumer Technologies
AK Vienna: Pressekonferenz: Wie uns Insta & Co. Süchtig macht! (Press conference: How Instagram and the like are making us addicted!) (German only)
AK Vienna: Die Tricks der Online-Händler (The tricks of online retailers) (German only)
BEUC: Towards the Digital Fairness Act
AK EUROPA: Insufficient consumer protection on the internet. The results are in for the “Digital Fairness Fitness Check”
AK EUROPA: Digital Fairness - Safeguarding consumer self-determination in the digital world
Legislative Train Schedule: Digital Fairness Act