The Meta 's Algorithm Could Be Forced Back to Basics

Adshine.pro10/06/202522 views
Cover
Facebook

At first glance, this might look like a minor case — another instance of EU regulators flexing their authority over social media companies. But a ruling by a Dutch court late last week could carry far-reaching consequences. The court found that Meta must provide easier access to non-algorithmic feed options, a decision that could reshape how major platforms present content and how regulators enforce the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) moving forward.

 

Last Thursday, the court ruled that Facebook and Instagram must give users clearer and more direct ways to view their timelines without algorithmic interference, in accordance with the DSA.

 

The lawsuit, filed by the digital rights organization Bits of Freedom, argues that Meta is currently in violation of Article 27 of the DSA. The regulation states that:

 

“Providers of online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions, in plain and intelligible language, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters […] Where several options are available for recommender systems that determine the relative order of information presented to recipients of the service, providers of online platforms shall also make available a functionality that allows the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option.”

 

In simpler terms, the DSA requires large platforms like Meta to explain how their recommendation systems operate and to let users modify those systems to shape their experience.

 

But this specific case goes further. The DSA also mandates that:

 

“That [selection and modification] functionality shall be directly and easily accessible from the specific section of the online platform’s online interface where the information is being prioritized.”

 

That means the option to change what users see must be clearly visible and easy to use right within the feed — not buried in hidden menus.

 

Now, Meta does technically allow users to switch to a chronological feed — a feature introduced in 2022 following regulatory scrutiny in multiple markets.

 

However, users cannot make the chronological view their default, and Meta clearly benefits from that friction. As Bits of Freedom explains:

 

“Meta has an interest in steering users toward a feed where it can show as many interest- and behavior-based ads as possible. That is the core of Meta’s revenue model. Subtle design techniques push users toward that feed, while the non-profiled feed is hidden behind a logo, making it hard to find. Users who do choose the alternative timeline also lose direct access to features such as Direct Messages. Moreover, when you open the app, it always starts with Meta’s feed, even if the user selected a different one before. Because of the judge’s ruling, Meta must change its behavior.”

 

If the court’s decision stands — Meta has already announced it will appeal — the company could be forced to let users permanently opt out of algorithmic feeds, effectively making a chronological view the default experience.

 

Meta, unsurprisingly, strongly opposes that outcome. The company insists that algorithmic feeds enhance engagement and overall satisfaction. Instagram chief Adam Mosseri has repeatedly argued that chronological feeds simply don’t work anymore.

 

As Mosseri put it:

 

“We’ve tested [non-algorithm feeds] and tried it a number of times. Every time we have, there’s a sub-group of people who are happy, there’s a bunch of people who forget that they’re in it, and then overall, everybody who’s in it uses Instagram less and less over time. And when we ask them questions like ‘how satisfied are you with Instagram?’, they actually report being less happy with Instagram more and more over time, on average. And then there’s these second-order effects where their friends start using Instagram less [and] because they use it less, they send less likes and comments, messages, and then there’s all of this other stuff, and it just gets worse and worse, and quickly.”

 

Meta’s business model depends on engagement — keeping users scrolling longer, reacting more, and generating behavioral data to refine ad targeting. Algorithmic feeds drive that cycle. From both a business standpoint and, according to Mosseri, a user-experience standpoint, Meta believes that recommendation systems create a better environment.

 

Yet, critics argue that algorithms are also engines of division. Because they reward engagement above all else, they inevitably amplify emotionally charged content — and the emotions that drive the most engagement are fear, anger, and joy. This dynamic can polarize communities and distort public discourse.

 

That was the central argument made by former Facebook employee turned whistleblower Frances Haugen. Her testimony and leaked documents revealed how engagement-based ranking systems can promote outrage and misinformation while Meta allegedly ignored the societal harm such systems caused. Haugen argued that removing engagement-based ranking would cool the emotional temperature of social media and curb the spread of manipulative, rage-inducing content.

 

Her point had merit. While eliminating algorithmic ranking wouldn’t completely stop polarizing material from circulating — users could still share what they wish — it could at least reduce the incentive for sensationalism and force publishers to prioritize more balanced reporting.

 

However, such a move would come with trade-offs. Usage would almost certainly decline, as Mosseri noted, and social platforms’ ad revenue would follow suit. Still, the Dutch court’s ruling could set up the first real-world test of whether a non-algorithmic feed can function at scale — and whether it truly makes social media healthier.

 

Meta has been given two weeks to comply with the court’s order and provide users with a “direct and simple” way to switch off algorithmic recommendations. The company’s appeal will delay implementation, but the issue is far from over.

 

If upheld, this case could mark a turning point in the EU’s ongoing effort to rebalance the power between platforms and users — and challenge the algorithmic foundations that have defined the modern social web.

 

📢 If you're interested in Facebook Ads Account, don't hesitate to connect with us!

🔹 https://linktr.ee/Adshinepro

💬 We're always ready to assist you!