8 Amendments of Kim VAN SPARRENTAK related to 2023/2043(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas many digital services, such as online games, social media, streaming services for films, series or music, online marketplaces or web shops and dating apps are designed to keep users on the platform for as long as possible so as to maximise the time and money they spend there; whereas consequently many online services are designed to retain users’ attention or to be as addictive as possible; whereas the terms ‘addictive design’ or ‘behavioural design’ of online services describe features that lead to behaviour- related forms of digital addiction, such as, ‘excessive or harmful internet use’, ‘smartphone addiction’, ‘technological or internet addiction’, ‘social media addiction’; whereas there is a growing consensus among academics that phenomena, such as ‘social media addiction’ exist; whereas we must look into the attention retaining or addictive features that incite that behaviour, not the media or devices as such, which can perfectly work without attention retaining or addictive features;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas addictive design features are often linked to psychosocial patterns playing on consumers’ psychological needs, vulnerabilities and desires, such as social belonging, social anxiety, fear of missing out (encouraged by information being available only temporarily, such as ‘stories’, ‘is typing…’), network effects, the urge to finish tasks in a flow, even if interrupted (endless scrolling,, for example by removing all ‘stopping cues’ (endless scrolling, autoplay of videos or taking a number of seconds to load your newsfeed) and, by setting goals for users and playing into loss of self-control; whereas design features can be addictive for different reasons, such as an intermittent variable reward, leading to a dopamine surge, just like the dynamics of slot machines, such as push notifications, or social reciprocity leading to chemical brain reactions, where on the one hand people receive social gratification, such as likes, and on the other hand people feel social pressure to respond to people, such as with read-receipts;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the described features above are combined with granular personalisation to influence users on an individual level, thus increasing the behavioural patterns and risks identified;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas many tech companies use experimental dashboards to base their design decisions on; whereas such real- life experiments are made directly on consumers without their knowledge or consent; whereas it is unclear to what extent such experiments are subject to safety measures due to the lack of transparency in their deployment;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the Commission study on unfair commercial practices in the digital environment has found that transparency provisions against dark patterns and manipulative personalisation practices both for average and vulnerable consumers are insufficient to counter the negative consequences; calls on the Commission to prohibit the most harmful practices, which are not yet blacklisted in Annex I of the UCPD or other EU legislation, and to impose a fair/neutral design obligation on traders;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Urges the Commission to impose a fair/neutral design obligation on traders; stresses that a fair design obligation should be a duty of care for online service providers to ensure their design is not addictive, laying the burden of proof on online services providers; notes that sharing the outcomes of online services providers’ experimentation dashboards and the consequent effects on the users on their platforms with authorities and consumers is instrumental in proving the effects of design features, including that the design feature is not addictive; calls on the Commission to examine and review regulative action with regards to experimentation with consumers in this regard; calls for a right for consumers to contest new design features if consumers feel these design features are addictive and thus unfair;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the Commission assessment on taxonomies of dark patterns clarifinotes that certain addictive design features aremay not be taken into account in the current legislation, including the infinite scroll and the default auto play function present in services such as YouTube, Netflix, and Spotify; stresses that other addictive design features such as interaction-based recommender systems, constant push notifications or read receipt notifications are not covered by existing legislation either; recalls that the Commission in its Guidancere remains legal uncertainty on the interpretation of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive expressed concern over uncertainty regarding the rules applicable to addictive interface designs; calls on the Commission to prohibit addictive techniques outside a commercial or privacy sphere in which the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) are not applicable;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Demands that, in its legislation on addictive design, the Commission puts forward a digital ‘right not to be disturbed’ including design that would turn all attention seeking features off by default, offering consumers real choice and autonomy, without burdening them with an information overload;