As internet users, do we still control what content we see on Facebook or Instagram? Or are we being deliberately steered toward personalized feeds or algorithms that collect more data about us and keep us on the platform longer?
Those are the key questions at the heart of the latest investigation by Ireland's media regulator into Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.
The authority is investigating whether Facebook and Instagram's recommendation systems violate Article 27 of the European Digital Services Act (DSA). Under this law, EU citizens have the right to understand and modify their social media platforms' algorithms at any time. The investigation is now looking into whether Meta uses manipulative user interfaces — so-called dark patterns — to unnecessarily complicate these choices for its users.
A breach of the DSA could result in fines of up to 6% of global annual revenue. In Meta's case, this would amount to up to €20 billion ($23.5 billion).
What are dark patterns?
Dark patterns are specific web design tricks designed to influence users into doing something they don't actually want to do or that isn't in their best interest. They often exploit users' desire for convenience, their lack of time, or their fear of missing out. The goal is to trick users into making purchases, signing up for subscriptions or sharing personal information.
In the current case, the Irish media regulator is investigating whether Meta intentionally hides the option to switch between a personalized and a purely chronological feed deep down in different menu options, and whether the company simply resets the selected setting after the app is closed — to get users to eventually agree to the personalized feed just to be left alone.
Meta is by no means the only tech company suspected of using dark patterns. Similar user interfaces can be found on many social media platforms and online stores, as well as in mobile games and other apps. The most common dark patterns include:
- Confirmation shaming: When users are asked a question, for example about data tracking for personalized ads, they are given two options: The button to consent is large and colorful, while the one to decline is small and gray. It is also often labeled in a manipulative way, such as "no, I want to continue seeing irrelevant ads," as if choosing this option is something to be ashamed of because it is supposedly worse than the other.
- Hidden "no" buttons: Often, there is a "yes" button, but the other button says "more options," so users have to click their way through additional submenus just to select "no". Sometimes answer options are also pre-selected with checkmarks ("prechecked boxes"), so the user must first actively deselect them.
- Artificial time pressure: Online retailers often use this tactic. For example, they might display a flashing countdown timer or messages like "only one item left in stock!" or "X [number of] people are currently viewing this item." This tactic is designed to put users under pressure and prompt them to make a hasty, ill-considered purchase.
- Nagging: Users are repeatedly prompted to take a specific action to get them to eventually agree, just to get rid of the annoying notification. This can happen, for example, when booking a trip that involves multiple steps: The suggestion to purchase travel cancellation insurance or reserve a seat for an additional fee appears on every page.
- The "pay or OK" model: This forces users to either pay for ad-free use of a website or consent to the processing of their data for personalized advertising. Consumer advocates criticize this model because it does not give users an equal choice and effectively pressures them into sharing their data, since the only other option involves a fee.
- The "cockroach motel": This model makes it easy for users to sign up for a specific service or take out a subscription with the click of a button. But it is extremely difficult to cancel. Often, the options for doing so are buried deep in submenus or a written cancellation notice or phone call is required. The term for this practice is derived from a US cockroach trap where the insects can check in but never check out.
- Another common practice involves initially free-trial subscriptions that automatically renew if they are not canceled in advance. The cost of these subscriptions upon renewal is displayed only very subtly.
What can consumers do to protect themselves from dark patterns?
Under the Digital Services Act, the EU has effectively banned online platform operators from using such practices. Users must not be deceived, manipulated or prevented from making free choices by the design of a website.
Such dark patterns often operate in a legal gray area. There is no clear, uniform legal definition of when a design is "manipulative." Many websites use psychological mechanisms that are questionable but not outright illegal.
Making users aware of these tricks is still the best way to prevent people from falling for them. Given the huge number of dark pattern models online, various websites, ranging from consumer protection organizations to academic research projects, have compiled lists of them to make the underlying mechanisms public.
In general, the German consumer protection organization advises internet users to always proceed with caution when surfing the web, to avoid clicking on preset buttons too quickly, and to always carefully review checkboxes and shopping carts. Additionally, users should not allow themselves to be pressured into making hasty purchase decisions and should not let websites make them feel guilty.
This article was originally published in German.
