Opinion

Ban addictive design EU-wide, not country by country

Brussels has the evidence, the findings and the law to stop infinite scroll and autoplay. It must decide now, because a patchwork of national bans leaves you unprotected in Lisbon or Tallinn.

Here is an argument we did not expect to make: a Dutch MP is fighting for the right thing with the wrong map. On 2 November 2026, Barbara Kathmann of the PvdA proposed banning addictive algorithms in the Netherlands, and she is coordinating with parliamentarians in seven other member states to do the same. Her instinct is right. Infinite scroll and autoplay are designed to keep you scrolling. But seven of the eight want to regulate by law and only Kathmann has actually proposed legislation, so calling it eight bans is ahead of the facts. It is a patchwork over a single market. This fight belongs at EU level, and the law to fight it with already exists.

Look at what Brussels has already found. Since May 2024 the Commission has investigated Meta's Facebook and Instagram. In February 2026 it issued preliminary findings that TikTok breaches the Digital Services Act; in July 2026 it did the same to Meta. The Commission even knows what the cure is: autoplay and infinite scroll disabled by default, real screen-time breaks, recommendation algorithms stopped from maximising engagement. The evidence is gathered. The findings are written. And no final decision has been issued, no fine imposed, no design changed. The Commission held the evidence and let the clock run. Kathmann says European action takes too long, and parliamentarians in seven other countries want to regulate this by law.

Kathmann prefers tackling harmful algorithms at European level. She says it just takes too long. So the Dutch proposal, and the coordination with seven other capitals, is her workaround. The honest reading is uncomfortable for Brussels. The Commission asked for the right things: autoplay and infinite scroll disabled by default, effective screen-time breaks, an algorithm no longer tuned to maximise engagement. Meta contests the findings, and no final decision has been issued. The Commission asked, then let the clock run. The Digital Fairness Act is expected to be proposed on 11 November 2026, negotiated in parallel to the EU Kids Act. That is where addictive design must land. Kathmann herself says enforcement must ultimately happen at EU level, and the Netherlands moved alone only because the Amsterdam ruling gave it the only algorithm-free option on Instagram and Facebook in Europe.

The fair objection goes like this: we are not fragmenting anything, we are saving time. National pressure has pushed Brussels before, and Germany's cancellation button for online shops started national and became European. The Amsterdam court ruling already made Meta blink, giving the Netherlands the only algorithm-free option on Instagram and Facebook in Europe. Waiting for Brussels is exactly what Kathmann says she cannot afford: European-level action takes too long, in her words. The point is real. But a court ruling in one city and a button in one shop are narrow wins. Only the Commission can impose binding obligations on companies across the union, and a patchwork that works in The Hague does nothing for you in Lisbon or Tallinn.

So here is what must happen next. Meta is contesting the findings, and the Commission has issued no final decision in either case. Stop contesting, start deciding. Kathmann herself says she prefers to tackle these algorithms at European level, but that it takes too long. She is asking Brussels to hurry. It should. The Digital Fairness Act is expected on 11 November and will be negotiated in parallel to the EU Kids Act. Put the ban in both and let them reinforce each other. Give it to her. Ban addictive design EU-wide, not patched country by country, and do it this month.