Now also Google: After X and Meta, no fact check - Does the EU accept the Community Notes as an alternative?

Google refuses to integrate fact checks

The European Union is facing a significant setback in the fight against online disinformation. Google has told the EU Commission that it will not integrate fact-checking mechanisms directly into its search results and YouTube videos. This decision, which the group announced in mid-January 2025, contrasts with the EU's efforts to curb the spread of false information. In a letter to European Union authorities, Kent Walker, Google's president of global affairs, argued that implementing such fact checks on the company's services was neither appropriate nor effective.

In a letter to the EU Commission dated January 16, 2025, Kent Walker, Google's president of global affairs, said that integrating fact-checking was "simply not appropriate or effective for our services."

A trend among technology companies

This move by Google is part of a trend that is already evident at other large technology companies. Just days before Google's announcement, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, announced the discontinuation of its fact-checking program in the United States. These developments cast a shadow over the future of cooperation between the tech giants and the European Union in the field of combating disinformation.

Suitable for:

• Meta does it like X: 'Community Notes' replace the 'fact check' - but there's a catch

Impact on EU regulatory strategy

Google's decision is particularly explosive in light of the 2022 Code of Conduct to Combat Disinformation and the Digital Services Act (DSA). The EU Commission had hoped to convert the voluntary obligations set out in the code - including the integration of fact checks - into legally binding requirements within the framework of the DSA. The EU now faces the challenge of readjusting its strategy.

The situation is further complicated by the perceived growing pressure on European regulators from major technology companies. Observers see a connection here with Donald Trump's looming second term as US President, which may signal a changing US attitude towards the regulation of technology companies.

Origin of the Code of Conduct and Google's reasoning

The EU code of conduct to combat disinformation, introduced in 2022, was based on technology companies' voluntary commitment to take certain measures. This explicitly included the integration of fact checks into search results and ranking algorithms in order to make reliable information more accessible to users and to display false information less prominently. The Digital Services Act (DSA) should transform these voluntary obligations into a binding set of rules to ensure enforcement and establish a consistent approach to dealing with disinformation.

Google justifies its negative stance with the assessment that directly integrating fact checks into its own services is not the right way. Kent Walker said in his letter to the EU Commission that such an approach was “simply not appropriate or effective for our services”. Instead, Google refers to its existing content moderation mechanisms. An example of this is the ability for users to add contextual information and annotations to YouTube videos. Google argues that these measures are enough to counter the spread of misinformation. However, critics complain that these user-generated tips often come too late, are not always reliable and do not have the same impact as official labeling by independent fact-checkers.

Suitable for:

• Opinion and discussion contribution: Community notes instead of fact checks – include users with different perspectives

Consequences for combating disinformation

Google's decision has far-reaching implications and provokes different reactions. The announcement to withdraw from the planned fact-checking obligations before the code is converted into a legally binding DSA code of conduct sends a clear signal. Meta's move to shut down its fact-checking program in the US reinforces concerns that a broader trend is emerging in which major platforms seek to shirk their responsibility to combat disinformation. The EU Commission now faces the difficult task of rethinking its strategy to combat disinformation and finding alternative ways to curb the spread of false information online.

Google's refusal could have various consequences. A possible EU reaction would be to take legal action against the company if it persistently refuses to comply with the requirements of the DSA. The DSA imposes significant financial penalties for violations, which can be up to 6% of a company's annual global turnover. Such a dispute would not only have financial implications, but could also further exacerbate political tensions between the EU and US technology companies, particularly in the context of the upcoming US presidential election and the associated political uncertainties.

Long-term challenges and possible changes

For the future, this means that the EU Commission is faced with an important decision. It must assess how it responds to Google's negative stance and whether the DSA may need to be adjusted or tightened to ensure compliance by major technology companies. These developments could have far-reaching implications for the future regulation of online platforms in Europe and fundamentally change the way disinformation is combated in the digital space. It's more than just the question of fact checking; It's about the balance between the freedom of technology companies to innovate and protecting citizens from harmful misinformation in an increasingly digital world. The coming months will show how the EU responds to this challenge and what new paths are taken in the fight against disinformation.

EU reaction and possible consequences

The EU Commission has not yet signaled any official acceptance of Community Notes as an alternative to fact checks. On the contrary, the EU has already warned Meta not to stop the fact-checking program in the EU. Thomas Regnier, Commission spokesman for digital affairs, pointed to EU law that requires platforms to reduce systemic risks such as disinformation.

The EU could impose fines of up to 6% of a company's annual global turnover for breaches of the Digital Services Act (DSA). This could have significant financial consequences for Google.

Challenges for the EU

The EU now faces the challenge of rethinking its strategy to combat disinformation. Although the DSA does not require specific moderation tools, the methods chosen by platforms must effectively prevent the spread of harmful content.

It remains to be seen how the EU will respond to Google's refusal and whether it will adapt or tighten the DSA to ensure compliance by large technology companies. The development could have far-reaching implications for the future regulation of online platforms and the fight against disinformation in Europe.

Suitable for:

• Purpose-driven marketing: self-criticism instead of apparent perfection – a new approach to branding? Critical marketing as a success factor
• How the startup Astral wants to use AI agents for marketing on social media - and reignites the debate about authenticity