Big Tech accused of obstructing EU researchers under Digital Services Act

Researchers allege that major technology companies, including TikTok, X, and Meta, are obstructing access to data legally required under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). Despite legislative amendments intended to facilitate academic study of systemic risks such as disinformation, researchers report facing excessive security requirements, narrow interpretations of eligibility, and high costs. The European Commission recently fined X €120 million for creating unnecessary barriers to researcher access, a decision X has appealed. While the Commission has accepted an action plan from X to improve data provision, researchers maintain that implementation remains inconsistent and that significant obstacles persist in obtaining comprehensive data for scientific verification.

The challenges facing academic oversight were highlighted by the case of Adriana Iamnitchi, chair of computational social sciences at Maastricht University. In October 2025, Iamnitchi applied for access to TikTok’s API to investigate how pro-Georgescu content was being monetised during Romania’s presidential election cycle. Her request was denied on the grounds that she failed to prove established researcher status or meet security requirements. This denial occurred shortly before TikTok flagged 116,000 accounts as potentially compromised in a network promoting Calin Georgescu, a candidate who benefited from massive exposure despite polling in the single digits prior to the vote.

Declassified Romanian intelligence indicated that Georgescu benefited from preferential treatment by TikTok, with allegations that Russia coordinated the online campaign. The first round of Romania’s November 2024 presidential vote was annulled; in the May 2025 runoff, independent candidate Nicușor Dan defeated George Simion. Iamnitchi stated that without access to the data, it is practically impossible to research how social media shapes society, noting that the past years have been tough for scholars interested in the impact of these platforms.

The DSA was designed to allow vetted researchers at credible institutions to access API data to study systemic risks, from illegal content to threats to fundamental rights. However, two years after the law took effect, researchers say they struggle to meet its security requirements and face narrow interpretations from platforms of what qualifies as a systemic risk. Application forms differ by platform, but most require data to be stored on infrastructure that cannot be compromised, such as a machine physically disconnected from the Internet, a resource most universities lack.

Duncan Allen of Democracy Reporting International (DRI) and the Society for Civil Rights sued X in February 2025 after X rejected their request to study political discourse ahead of Germany’s federal election; a Berlin court ruled in their favour, though jurisdictional issues arose in a subsequent case regarding Hungary’s election. Allen noted that EU law is still not uniformly applied, reflecting on the Hungarian case where researchers nearly lost due to jurisdictional disputes. The European Commission started meeting with platforms in May 2026 to develop a new standard for vetting researchers. Late last year, the Commission expanded researchers’ access to nonpublic platform data to study risks including illegal content, financial scams, and recommender systems.