It is the first sanction of this scale ever imposed on a global social network under the DSA, a regulation that came into force for large platforms in 2023 and is designed to increase transparency, safety and user protection in the European Union’s digital space. The subject was discussed on the programme “Eurovibe”. The guest on air was Wiktor Knowski, a TVN24 journalist who specialises in economics. The conversation was hosted by Piotr Firan, who began by asking how the new regulations are changing the rules for digital media.
Do fines really work?
“That’s a very fair question, because it is worth stressing that the fine imposed on X amounts to less than 6% of the company’s total turnover,” Wiktor Knowski noted. In his view, the X case itself is not the best illustration of how effective sanctions are, but another, telling example emerged this very week.
It concerns Meta, which was fined under a different European regulation, the Digital Markets Act. The penalty came to €200 million — more than in X’s case, although the platform itself operates on a far larger scale. Just as importantly, Meta has publicly declared that it is ready to comply with the European Commission’s recommendations.
“The company has announced that from next year Facebook users will have more say over exactly which of their data is used to rank and personalise content,” the journalist explained. This chiefly concerns the mechanisms of targeted advertising.
So, according to Knowski, EU regulations do have a real impact and are capable of changing the way social networks work. “It’s fair to say outright that such rules are necessary, even indispensable, in today’s digital reality,” he concluded.
The size of the fine and the demands on X
The fine for X amounts to €120 million (around $140 million), making it the largest penalty imposed under the DSA to date. On top of the financial penalty, the European Commission has set the platform specific requirements:
- to adjust its verification system so that the “blue tick” honestly reflects whether an account is authentic;
- to improve the transparency of its advertising repository and access to it;
- to give researchers genuine access to the platform’s public data.
If it fails to meet these requirements, X could face new and even tougher sanctions.
Musk’s angry reaction and the political context
Elon Musk reacted sharply to the European Commission’s decision, dismissing the fine as “bulls–t” and even calling for the abolition of the European Union, which, he claims, restricts freedom of speech. In response, X temporarily blocked the European Commission’s advertising account — a largely symbolic gesture, but a telling one.
Some American politicians joined in the criticism, describing the fine as “a blow to innovation”. Musk himself threw himself into the public debate, sharing posts with extremely radical rhetoric, including comparisons of the EU to the “Fourth Reich”.
Significantly, the row has spilled far beyond the subject of digital regulation. Senior US officials have weighed in, including Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Rubio even declared that the European Commission’s decision should be seen as “an attack on … the American people”.
“This is no longer an isolated incident but part of a much broader debate about the current state of relations between the US and the European Union,” Knowski stressed. As he sees it, the X case is being used in the American political narrative as an argument for isolationism and for distancing the US from the EU.
Three key breaches of the DSA
The European Commission identified three main breaches on X’s part.
The first is the deceptive use of the “blue tick”. Under the DSA rules, a verification mark should confirm that a person or organisation is genuine. X, however, handed it out to anyone who paid, without proper checks, which misled users and increased the risk of fraud.
The second breach is the lack of transparency in its advertising system. The law requires large platforms to maintain a public ad repository with information on who paid for the ads, what they are about and whom they target. In X’s case, access to such data was restricted and incomplete.
The third is that independent researchers were given only obstructed access to the platform’s public data, which is crucial for detecting disinformation and systemic risks to democracy.
What it means for the platforms’ future
According to Wiktor Knowski, the proceedings came as no surprise to X: the platform had known about them for more than two years. “The problem is that the political and media narrative often overshadows the real reasons the fine was imposed,” he noted.
The journalist pays particular attention to how the owners of the big platforms react. At the same time, he does not consider it a realistic scenario that such companies would pull out of the EU market. What is more, the DSA already gives users new tools to protect themselves, including a way of lodging complaints when content is removed without good reason. According to the available data, more than 70% of such complaints end with a demand that the material be restored.
“We can see that the DSA is genuinely shifting the balance of power between platforms and users,” Knowski emphasised.
Regulation or deregulation?
Amid the general enthusiasm for deregulation — including initiatives such as the Deregulacje Brzoski 2025 reform package in Poland — it is important to distinguish clearly between types of regulation. Some rules really can hold back the growth of small businesses and start-ups, while others are needed to curb the outsized influence of the largest corporations.
The Digital Services Act has become the foundation of modern digital regulation in Europe. Its first practical application against a major market player shows that these rules are not merely declarative but are backed by real oversight and painful fines.
For users, this means more transparency and protection from manipulation and opaque algorithms; for the platforms, a clear signal that the rules of the game in the EU’s digital environment are changing.
That was a conversation with Wiktor Knowski, a TVN24 journalist who specialises in economics.
Dr. Myroslav Trofymuk
Born in Lviv. Designer, director, musician, researcher, founder of ZEMLA STUDIO. Master of classical philology and digital marketing, PhD in the history of Ukrainian literature. Member of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine. Since 2022 he has authored the CENTRUM MUNDI audio show for Polish Radio for Ukraine, continuing the same research into the contemporary music scene in Ukraine and Poland.
Full bio →
