Dutch Proposal Seeks Global First With Ban on Addictive Online Tricks

2026-11-03 global

The Hague, Monday, 2 November 2026.
A Dutch bill introduced today would outlaw infinite scrolling and manipulative recommendation systems, legally treating addictive digital platform features as prohibited unfair commercial practices to protect consumer attention and spending.

A Legislative First in the Digital Age

On Monday, 2 November 2026, Dutch Member of Parliament Barbara Kathmann introduced a landmark legislative proposal in the Dutch Parliament to ban addictive digital design features across all online platforms, positioning the Netherlands as a potential global pioneer in digital consumer protection [1][2][4][5]. The bill, submitted by the opposition centre-left party Progressief Nederland, explicitly targets mechanisms such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, manipulative recommendation algorithms, and push notifications—design choices widely criticized for exploiting human psychology to maximize engagement and spending [1][2][4]. By classifying these features as ‘unfair commercial practices,’ Kathmann’s proposal seeks to legally redefine how digital platforms operate, shifting the burden of proof to companies to demonstrate that their services are not addictive [2][3][5].

Why Now? The Urgency Behind the Ban

The timing of Kathmann’s legislative push is deliberate. It coincides with the European Commission’s anticipated proposal in November 2026 under the Digital Fairness Act, which is expected to include measures addressing addictive design across the EU [1][4][5]. This legislative alignment reflects broader momentum in Europe, where policymakers are increasingly treating digital platform design as a matter of public health rather than mere convenience [1][4]. The proposal also builds on a 2023 European Parliament report led by Dutch MEP Kim van Sparrentak, which urged the European Commission to take action against addictive design—underscoring the Netherlands’ influential role in shaping EU digital policy [1][4][5]. Kathmann emphasized the need for urgent action, stating, “No self-discipline can beat Big Tech’s addictive tricks. Every day that we fail to take action, we let addictive algorithms manipulate our minds and in the long run our democracies” [1].

A Broad Reach: Platforms in the Crosshairs

The proposed ban would apply to a sweeping range of digital services, including social media networks, video gaming platforms, dating applications, video streaming services, and even chatbots [1][2][4][5]. Kathmann argues that these platforms have become the new ‘high street’ or ‘marketplace,’ where manipulative design features—such as endless feeds and impulse-purchase triggers—exploit users’ cognitive vulnerabilities [2][3]. For example, she highlights how algorithms on platforms like Instagram and Facebook have been linked to excessive screen time and compulsive spending, particularly among younger users [2][3]. In the Netherlands, lawmakers successfully secured an algorithm-free option on these platforms in early 2026 following a court ruling, setting a precedent for the current bill [2][3].

Global Implications and the EU’s Role

Should the Dutch proposal pass, it could establish a regulatory blueprint for the EU, particularly as the European Commission finalizes its Digital Fairness Act [1][4][5]. The bill’s collaborative approach—with Kathmann working alongside lawmakers in Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Italy, and Portugal—signals a coordinated effort to regulate digital platforms across Europe [1][2][4][5]. This regional strategy contrasts with the slower pace of global regulation, where lawsuits against companies like Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat have so far yielded limited systemic changes [1][5]. Kathmann’s push for a “fairness by design” duty of care reflects a growing consensus that digital platforms must prioritize user well-being over engagement metrics, a principle already embedded in the EU’s Digital Services Act of 2022 [1][4][5].

Challenges and the Path Forward

Despite the momentum, significant hurdles remain. The tech industry has historically resisted regulation, with lobbyists often diluting proposed rules to protect monetization models built around attention capture [alert! ‘lack of specific source for industry resistance mechanisms’]. The Dutch proposal’s classification of addictive design as ‘unfair commercial practice’—a legal category already used for physical products—could face constitutional challenges, as digital services have not traditionally been subject to such scrutiny [2][3]. Additionally, the proposal’s effectiveness hinges on enforcement mechanisms, which are still undefined [alert! ‘no source specifies enforcement details’]. Kathmann remains optimistic, however, pointing to past successes such as the Netherlands’ achievement of an algorithm-free option on major platforms earlier this year [2][3]. For now, the legislative process moves forward, with the Dutch Parliament set to deliberate on a proposal that could redefine the boundaries of digital innovation and consumer rights in the 21st century.

Sources

Digital regulation Algorithmic design