Shadowbanning unveiled: The landmark Belgian MEP case and its implications for digital rights

Shadowbanning, a widely used but under-acknowledged moderation tactic by platforms like Meta, has serious implications for freedom of expression across the political spectrum. Unlike overt censorship, shadowbanning restricts content visibility without users’ awareness, allowing platforms to influence discourse covertly and without transparency.

With the Digital Services Act (DSA) now in effect, new standards for lawful, transparent content moderation are emerging. In a landmark move, the Belgian court system produced the first-ever legal rulings on shadowbanning in the significant Belgian MEP case. First, the Court of first instance of Bruges issued a judgment on the 4th of January 2022. That judgment was overruled by the Ghent Court of Appeal in its judgments displayed below of the 24th of October 2022 and the third of June 2024. Both of these appeal judgments are very interesting to understand the clever reasoning that's being developed to prove a shadowban. These judgments mark a turning point in EU digital rights law, setting a precedent that could redefine how platforms are held accountable for hidden censorship tactics.

This case raises crucial questions: What was the legal position on shadowbanning prior to the DSA, and how has it evolved with the DSA’s implementation and this recent Belgian court decision? As the EU refines its stance on content moderation transparency, the implications of this ruling are poised to influence digital governance standards throughout Europe.

Given the quality of the legal reasoning in the judgment and the fact that it is one of the first judgments in Europe on shadowbanning, this working paper includes a scientifically controlled translation of the judgment into English.