Kristina Roberts
On October 2, 2025, something very important happened in the Netherlands. A Dutch court made a ruling against Meta, the company that owns Facebook and Instagram. The judges told Meta that people using these social media platforms must be given simple and clear options when it comes to their timelines. In other words, users should be able to decide whether they want to see posts in order of time or through Meta’s system of recommendations, which is based on profiling and algorithms.
The court said Meta had not been following the European Union’s Digital Services Act, also known as the DSA. This law is designed to make the online world safer and fairer. The judges explained that Meta’s current design was unfair to users, because it made it very hard for them to control what kind of content appeared on their screens. Meta has now been given two weeks to change this and provide users with a “direct and simple” way to choose a non-profiled timeline.
The ruling also mentioned that when users select a chronological or simple timeline, their choice must stay active. Right now, Facebook and Instagram automatically return to the profiled version every time someone closes the app or website. The judges called this behavior a “dark pattern.” Dark patterns are tricky designs that push people into making decisions they may not want to make. The court added that this practice also interfered with the right to freedom of information.
The judges gave a very strong reason for their decision. They said, “People in the Netherlands are not sufficiently able to make free and autonomous choices about the use of profiled recommendation systems.” In other words, users are not really free to choose what they want to see because the system keeps steering them toward Meta’s recommendations.
This ruling came at a very sensitive time for the country. The Netherlands has a general election scheduled for October 29, 2025. The judges felt it was especially important for citizens to have more control over what they see online during such a critical moment. Social media can play a huge role in shaping opinions, and the court wanted to make sure people were not being manipulated by automatic profiling.
Meta, however, did not accept the ruling quietly. A spokesperson for the company said that Meta would be appealing the decision. She explained, “We introduced substantial changes to our systems to meet our regulatory obligations under the DSA (EU’s Digital Services Act), and notified users in the Netherlands about how they can use our tools to experience our platforms without personalisation.”
Meta also argued that the case should not have been decided by a court in one country. The spokesperson said the issue should be dealt with by the European Commission and other regulators at the European level, not by national courts. According to her, “Proceedings like this threaten the digital single market and the harmonized regulatory regime that should underpin it.”
But while Meta defended itself, the Dutch digital rights group Bits of Freedom, which had brought the case to court, celebrated the ruling. A spokesperson for the group, Maartje Knaap, said, “It is unacceptable that a few American tech billionaires can determine how we view the world.” This statement showed how strongly the group feels about giving people more power over their own online experiences.
The case highlights a bigger debate happening not just in Europe but around the world. Social media companies like Meta often use algorithms to decide what content people see. These algorithms are designed to keep users engaged for longer, but they also rely heavily on personal data and profiling. Critics say this practice can limit people’s freedom by showing them only certain types of content, and it can also be harmful during important political events like elections.
The Digital Services Act, which the court referred to in this ruling, is one of the strongest laws in the world when it comes to online platforms. It requires companies like Meta to be more transparent about how their systems work and to give users more control. The law is meant to protect people from unfair or manipulative online practices, making sure that the internet is a safer and more democratic space.
In this case, the court’s ruling means that Dutch users should soon be able to clearly decide whether they want to see their timeline in the order that posts were made or through the recommendation system. The ruling insists that once users make a choice, that choice must remain in place and not be undone by the platform itself.
The decision also sends a strong message to other technology companies. It shows that courts are ready to step in and protect users if platforms fail to follow the rules. While Meta plans to appeal, the ruling has already become an important moment in the conversation about how much power tech giants should have over people’s lives.
This case also reminds us of the balance between innovation and responsibility. Meta and other companies argue that personalized timelines make the user experience more enjoyable. But at the same time, people should not be forced into systems they do not want. The right to choose freely is at the center of this issue.
As the appeal process begins, many people will be watching closely. If Meta is forced to make the changes in the Netherlands, other countries in the European Union might also demand similar steps. This could eventually affect how Facebook and Instagram work across Europe, giving millions of people more control over their online lives.
The story is still unfolding, but one thing is clear: the Dutch court has taken a bold step to remind powerful tech companies that people’s rights must come first. Whether Meta accepts this or continues its fight, the case has already sparked a larger discussion about freedom, choice, and fairness in the digital age.
