Dear readers,
Enforcement is increasingly at the centre of the response to disinformation, with recent developments showing how regulatory frameworks are being actively tested in practice. From civil society pushing for investigations to platforms challenging court rulings, these cases reflect both growing momentum and the remaining gap between ambition and real-world application.
At the same time, efforts to strengthen deterrence and platform accountability are gaining traction, even if progress remains uneven. Investigations, legal action, and growing scrutiny are increasingly exposing systemic weaknesses, while also pointing to the need for more consistent and effective safeguards.
AI is accelerating these dynamics, while coordinated networks and strategic narratives continue to shape public perception across political, geopolitical, and climate debates. Together, these trends underline a shift from isolated incidents to a more systemic challenge, reinforcing the importance of structural approaches to protect the information ecosystem.
You might notice things look a little different in this edition of the newsletter. We’ve shifted towards a more concise format, designed to give you a clearer, quicker read on the developments that matter most. Dive in below to explore the details, and feel free to share your thoughts – you can simply hit reply and let us know what you think.
National responses & regulatory expansion
Governments are stepping up efforts to address online harms and foreign interference, expanding legal frameworks and enforcement powers at the national level. Recent measures point to a more interventionist approach, particularly around election integrity, platform liability, and the protection of vulnerable users. This includes moves towards stronger deterrence, with proposals such as criminal liability for tech executives who fail to remove harmful content like non-consensual intimate images. At the same time, responses vary across jurisdictions, reflecting differences in scope, ambition, and enforcement approaches, even as countries such as Turkey join others like Australia and several European states in introducing age-based restrictions on social media.
- France plans new law to counter foreign interference ahead of elections.
- UK considers jail terms for failure to remove revenge porn.
- Turkey passes a law restricting social media access for under-15s.
Enforcement & the DSA gap
The Digital Services Act is increasingly being tested, with recent cases revealing tensions between regulatory ambition and how enforcement unfolds in practice. Rather than relying solely on centralised DSA mechanisms, enforcement is often shaped by a combination of regulatory processes, external pressure, and legal challenges, from civil society pushing for investigations to legal action against platforms and court rulings being contested. These developments highlight differences between the framework’s design and its implementation, with outcomes shaped by interpretation, access, and institutional processes.
- More than 80 NGOs urge the Commission to investigate Telegram under DSA.
- Reporters Without Borders renews legal action against X in France over disinformation.
- TikTok challenges German ruling on DSA compliance requirements.
Platform accountability & monetisation risks
Platform systems continue to enable and amplify harm through their design, curation, and monetisation models. Recent cases show how commercial incentives can shape what content is displayed, prioritised, or monetised – from advertisements appearing when users search for support on sensitive issues, to inadequate content curation, and disputes over how advertising revenues are distributed and how media ratings affect the visibility and presentation of information online. These developments highlight how business models interact with accountability mechanisms, affecting both the visibility of information and the effectiveness of existing safeguards.
- Ad funding continues to support health misinformation websites.
- Google shows ads for paid services ahead of free help when users seek to remove intimate images.
- Polymarket betting content surfaced in Google News, highlighting a curation failure.
- NewsGuard claims legal victory in dispute over ad pressure and media ratings.
AI, credibility and information integrity
AI is emerging as a structural risk to the information ecosystem, not only spreading disinformation but accelerating its scale, distorting credibility, and introducing new forms of harm. Recent developments show a shift from isolated misuse to systemic impact: from “slopaganda” flooding platforms with high-volume, low-quality content, to AI systems reproducing and legitimising unreliable medical claims. At the same time, AI-generated summaries are introducing errors at scale, while platform systems continue to promote “nudify” apps. Synthetic media is also being used in targeted political campaigns to produce highly shareable, entertainment-driven content, such as as AI-generated “Lego-style” videos.
- Apple and Google steer users towards AI “nudify” apps despite policy bans.
- “Slopaganda”: AI-generated content floods platforms as a political weapon.
- Scientists invented a fake disease. AI told people it was real.
- Pro-Iran “Lego-style” AI videos go viral across global audiences.
- Google’s AI overviews are ~90% accurate, yet produce millions of wrong answers.
Explore more in our recently updated AI Disinfo Hub, where we gather the latest research, tools, and analysis on AI-driven disinformation.
Information influence & strategic narratives
Disinformation continues to evolve through coordinated networks, state actions, and media dynamics, shaping how narratives are produced, amplified, and contested. Recent cases show how actors exploit platform features, digital infrastructures, and societal vulnerabilities to influence public perception, from political campaigns and geopolitical conflicts to climate and energy debates. Together, these developments highlight the growing sophistication and strategic use of disinformation across the information ecosystem.
- Pro-Conservative network manipulates X’s Community Notes to suppress fact-checks during the UK election.
- Russia reportedly blocks access to Bluesky as part of a broader effort to control online information.
- Hungarian intelligence used ad-based tracking system to monitor users, prompting investigation.
- Experts warn of a growing “war of disinformation” in global conflicts.
- Climate disinformation widespread in mainstream media, with private outlets driving most cases.
- Coordinated Facebook network spreads disinformation to undermine heat pumps and promote gas.
- Study shows emotions shape young adults’ resilience to disinformation.
Brussels corner
Joint committee work on the AgoraEU funding package gets underway. Work is continuing apace on the European Parliament’s position on the AgoraEU funding package, which includes the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) programme – a crucial tool in the fight against disinformation. Unusually, the file is jointly led by two committees, the Culture (CULT) and Civil Liberties (LIBE) committees, with public deliberations starting in June following significant behind-the-scenes progress, supported by opinions from other committees.
Digital Services Act: developments in enforcement. The European Commission has launched infringement proceedings against Member States for failing to meet their obligations under the Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly on appointing Digital Services Coordinators (DSCs). Yet the Commission itself has fallen short in enforcing key provisions for very large online platforms, with civil society stepping in to take successful court action. This raises questions about whether Member States should also consider legal solutions when the Commission does not fulfil its own obligations.
Explore the full Brussels Corner on our website.
🧡 One thing we loved
We loved this post from the Global Disinformation Index for stating something simple but essential: tools to detect disinformation already exist, but access to platform data is still restricted. The problem is not technical, it’s structural and regulatory.
Not a new point, but one worth repeating over and over.
📚 Recommended pick
This week’s recommended read by our Project Manager Inès Gentil is the latest report from the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre: Fractured Reality: How Democracy Can Win the Global Struggle Over the Information Space.
The report explores how engagement-driven platform business models can undermine democratic debate by prioritising attention over truth, fuelling polarisation, weakening shared reality, and enabling what the authors describe as a “fantasy-industrial complex” of political, commercial and digital actors spreading distortion and manipulation. It also highlights how algorithms tend to reward emotional and divisive content, creating echo chambers and increasingly separate “echo platforms.” Generative AI amplifies these risks further by producing persuasive content at scale while creating dangerous illusions of knowledge and authority.
The report stresses that neither individual-level interventions nor content moderation alone are sufficient – systemic reform of platform business models is essential. It calls specifically for a progressive tax on digital advertising, stronger competition through interoperability requirements, meaningful restoration of user autonomy, and sustained investment in European digital infrastructure that is not dependent on foreign corporate control.
👀 Spotted
Our Project Manager Inès Gentil spoke at an EDMO BELUX workshop in Luxembourg, sharing insights on disinformation-related vulnerabilities and platform accountability. The event brought together experts across sectors to exchange knowledge and strengthen collective approaches to tackling disinformation.
Our Senior Researcher Raquel Miguel Serrano joined the Third International Conference on FIMI in Buenos Aires, Argentina, contributing to global discussions on foreign interference and disinformation.
🤝 Community meetups
EU DisinfoLab organises regular meetups across Europe to connect researchers, practitioners, and policymakers, offering a friendly space to exchange ideas and stay connected across the field.
On 19 May, we will gather again in Brussels for a pre-show meetup ahead of a performance of Antony and Cleopatra by Brussels Shakespeare Society. Those interested can also attend the play, which explores themes of disinformation, power, and emerging technologies – offering a fitting extension to the evening’s discussions (advance booking is required for the play).
Interested in joining this meetup, or one in another city? Simply reply to this email to let us know.
💬 EU DisinfoLab webinars
Join our upcoming sessions exploring disinformation trends and how evidence drives enforcement and accountability:
- 30 April. Look what you made me do: How FIMI actors weaponise pop culture
- 19 May. Ethics in the fight against disinformation: from theory to practice
- 28 May. David vs Goliath in the DSA era: Lessons from Bits of Freedom’s victory
- 4 June. Enforce on the DSA enforcers: how can Member States legally push the Commission to act?
Missed a session? Watch our past webinars.
🗓️ Events on our radar
- 12 May. Disinfo Talks | Webinar #2: On the Frontlines: Debunking Disinformation in Geopolitics and Climate Science with AI Solutions. AI4Debunk (In-person & online)
- 19–23 May. Antony and Cleopatra. Brussels Shakespeare Society (Brussels, in-person)
- 1–2 June. Net4Society Matchmaking Event for 2026 Horizon Europe Cluster 2 calls (Paris, in-person)
- 15–18 June. Disinformation Summer Institute 2026 (California, in-person)
- 17–19 June. GlobalFact 2026. International Fact-Checking Network (Vilnius, in-person)
- 18–20 June. Fake News Festival 2026 (Frankfurt, in-person)
- 7–8 September. Countering Disinformation, Raising Democratic Resilience. EDMO BELUX 2.0 (Brussels, in-person)
- 6–8 October. #Disinfo2026. EU DisinfoLab (Vilnius, in-person)
🤝 Jobs & opportunities
- CCDH. Multiple positions
- OpenAI. Global Safety Response Operations Analyst
- ActiveFence. Multiple positions
- NewsGuard. Staff Reporter
- Moonshot. OSINT Analyst & Digital Advertising Specialist
- CDT. Senior Policy Analyst & Academic Year Externship
- ProPublica. Multiple roles
- ICO. Director of Technology Regulation & Director of Enterprise & Innovation
- Reset Tech. Data Science Officer
- Discord. Public Policy Advisor
- EEAS. Policy Officer
Have something to share – an event, job opening, publication? Send your suggestions via the “get in touch” form below, and we’ll consider them for the next edition of Disinfo Update.
Facts Only
Governments are expanding legal frameworks to address online harms, including foreign interference and platform liability.
France is planning a new law to counter foreign interference ahead of elections.
The UK is considering jail terms for tech executives who fail to remove revenge porn.
Turkey has passed a law restricting social media access for users under 15.
Over 80 NGOs have urged the European Commission to investigate Telegram under the Digital Services Act (DSA).
Reporters Without Borders has renewed legal action against X in France over disinformation.
TikTok is challenging a German ruling on DSA compliance requirements.
Ad funding continues to support health misinformation websites.
Google has been criticized for showing ads for paid services ahead of free help for users seeking to remove intimate images.
AI-generated content, including "slopaganda," is flooding platforms as a political weapon.
Scientists invented a fake disease, and AI systems presented it as real.
Pro-Iran "Lego-style" AI videos have gone viral across global audiences.
A pro-Conservative network manipulated X’s Community Notes to suppress fact-checks during the UK election.
Russia has reportedly blocked access to Bluesky as part of broader online information control efforts.
The European Commission has launched infringement proceedings against Member States for failing to meet DSA obligations.
The EU is advancing the AgoraEU funding package, including the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) program.
The Global Disinformation Index highlights that tools to detect disinformation exist but access to platform data remains restricted.
A European Commission report calls for systemic reforms to platform business models, including a progressive tax on digital advertising.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative presented reflects a growing recognition of disinformation as a systemic challenge, not merely a series of isolated incidents. Governments and civil society are increasingly intervening to regulate platforms, but enforcement remains uneven, with gaps between regulatory ambition and practical implementation. The Digital Services Act (DSA) is a focal point, yet its effectiveness is being tested by legal challenges and civil society pressure, revealing institutional and interpretive hurdles. Platforms continue to prioritize monetization over accountability, with AI accelerating the spread of disinformation through mechanisms like "slopaganda" and synthetic media. This underscores a deeper tension: the commercial incentives of engagement-driven platforms often conflict with democratic integrity, as algorithms reward divisive content and echo chambers.
The push for structural reforms—such as progressive taxation on digital advertising and interoperability requirements—suggests a shift toward addressing root causes rather than symptoms. However, the fragmented nature of national responses and the complexity of cross-border enforcement raise questions about whether these measures can keep pace with evolving disinformation tactics. The involvement of state actors, coordinated networks, and private entities in shaping narratives further complicates the landscape, as seen in cases like Russia’s blocking of Bluesky or the manipulation of X’s Community Notes.
**Patterns detected:** ARC-0024 Ambiguity (regulatory frameworks with unclear enforcement mechanisms), ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (platforms claiming compliance while challenging specific rulings).
**Root cause:** The paradigm driving this narrative is the collision between platform capitalism and democratic governance. The assumption that self-regulation or light-touch oversight can suffice is being dismantled, but the alternative—state-led intervention—risks overreach or inefficacy without robust safeguards.
**Implications:** The erosion of shared reality and the weaponization of information threaten civic trust and collective decision-making. While accountability mechanisms are strengthening, the pace of technological change and the adaptability of bad actors mean that systemic risks persist. The burden of these risks disproportionately falls on vulnerable users and marginalized communities, who are often the targets of coordinated disinformation campaigns.
**Bridge questions:** How can regulatory frameworks balance innovation with accountability without stifling free expression? What role should civil society play in bridging the gap between policy design and enforcement? If AI-driven disinformation continues to outpace detection tools, what structural changes to platform business models would be most effective?
**Counterstrike scan:** A coordinated influence campaign would exploit regulatory ambiguity to sow distrust in enforcement mechanisms while amplifying narratives of platform censorship or government overreach. The actual content aligns with this pattern in highlighting enforcement gaps but does not exhibit the hallmarks of a deliberate disinformation playbook. The focus on systemic solutions suggests a constructive rather than manipulative intent.
Sentinel — Human
LIKELY_HUMAN (confidence: 0.25)