Beyond the Buzz and Assumptions: What European Consumers REALLY Think About Personalisation and Online Fairness
Main takeaways
- Dark patterns are real, but European consumers take action against them and generally feel problems get resolved
- Consumers reward transparency and choice, and actively punish misbehaving brands
- The Digital Fairness Act should prioritise targeted enforcement and harmonisation of existing consumer laws, rather than introducing broad measures without a clear aim
The European Union is seeking to modernise consumer protection, and has announced plans for a Digital Fairness Act (DFA) in 2026. The process began in 2024, when the European Commission published its Digital Fairness Fitness Check, evaluating whether EU consumer laws remain fit for purpose and identifying harmful online practices.
Among the practices that the Commission is now considering to address through the DFA are dark patterns, unfair personalisation, misleading practices by influencers, and other manipulative or deceptive tactics. But what exactly does the Commission consider ‘unfair’ personalisation? And how accurately does the planned initiative truly reflect Europeans’ real experiences online?
A new survey of 10,500 consumers across 12 European countries provides a clear answer: Europeans are in fact digitally literate, assertive, and overwhelmingly value the benefits of a personalised digital experience. And they do so far more than the overly pessimistic conclusions drawn by the Digital Fairness Fitness Check would suggest.
These insights indicate that broad new EU measures are unlikely to be effective. Instead, the DFA should focus on smarter enforcement of existing laws and further harmonisation of recent consumer protections.
1. Personalisation is a win-win that Europeans truly value
The public debate too often tries to frame personalisation as inherently manipulative. Yet online businesses gather and use data on consumers’ online behaviour and preferences to offer a better, more personalised online experience – ranging from convenience and efficiency to protections for vulnerable users.
The consumer survey confirms this: Europeans view personalisation as beneficial. Over 70% of frequent internet users find it “highly useful” in areas like streaming and online shopping. Personalisation also saves time: 42% say personalised video feeds do, and 41% credit tailored interfaces with helping them find products and services faster on the internet.
In fact, a majority of consumers feel that the value of their online services would be undermined if these personalised features were removed, particularly younger users. For example, 50% of them value features like personalised subscription renewal reminders and consider that losing them would undermine their overall online experience.
2. Consumers aren’t passive victims of ‘dark patterns’
Dark patterns is a compelling term. It was first coined by Harry Brignull to describe tricks used on websites and apps that make users do things they didn’t intend. Examples include forced sign-ups, countdown clocks that create a false sense of urgency, or requiring users to share payment details to access a free trial.
A. Dark patterns do exist, but are not omnipresent
Dark patterns are a serious problem, but they are not nearly as common as some suggest. The consumer survey found that dark patterns are not pervasive across the entire online ecosystem. Two-thirds of Europeans report either not experiencing dark patterns at all, or encountering them on only one or two services in a specific sector (e.g. a few online marketplaces for clothing). This suggests the problem is concentrated, and definitely not a widespread industry practice. More crucially, European consumers are fighting back.
B. Europeans actively resist and seek recourse
Indeed, it is wrong to assume that European consumers are digitally illiterate. They are in fact active and assertive. For instance, 76% of below-average income respondents cancelled subscriptions due to deceptive design. In other words, misbehaving brands may survive for a while, but it won’t take long before consumers start punishing them.
A strong majority of European consumers also take steps to control their online experience. In the past year, 92% of below-average income Europeans unsubscribed from unwanted email lists, 77% manually disabled cookies, and 65% left a negative review. Once action is taken, most consumers report satisfactory resolutions. More than half of respondents across all income groups (55% of below-average, 61% of above-average) rate outcomes between 6 and 10 on a scale where 10 means “always resolved”.
3. The path forward: smarter enforcement, instead of more rules
This recent EU-wide survey portrays a digitally mature European consumer base, one that is aware and actively wants to manage its online experience. What is more, a strong majority of consumers understand and accept the trade-off that is inherent to a personalised internet. Nine out of 10 Europeans are aware that personalisation requires some form of data tracking. And only 23% oppose the idea that online services need to use their data in order to provide personalised services.
These findings also indicate that the Digital Fairness Act carries the risk of potentially undermining personalisation with overly broad measures. Because the EU already has existing – and in many cases, recent – digital and consumer protection instruments that address manipulative design. Think, for example, of the Digital Services Act, General Data Protection Regulation, and Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, to name a few.
Hence, the Digital Fairness Act should be viewed as an opportunity to strengthen coordinated enforcement against systematic abuses, rather than creating broad new rules. It should align existing frameworks and offer clearer guidance and coordination for both authorities and industry. The DFA must focus on genuine gaps. Only when there is concrete, measurable evidence that consumer harm is not adequately addressed by existing legislation should new initiatives be introduced to target these specific regulatory gaps.
Conclusion
The evidence is clear: European consumers value online personalisation. Moreover they are assertive and take action against dark patterns, while rewarding transparency. That is why the announced Digital Fairness Act must be designed in a way that protects consumers, without eroding the very benefits of online personalisation they clearly appreciate.
