Skip to content
DSA Recital 70 EN
LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this law. Contains: the full text of every article, recital and provision of this law. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Recital 70 — online platform recommender system transparency

In force — consolidated2022-10-27 · CELEX 02022R2065-20221027 · ELI ↗
Version history 1
  • 2022-10-27in force CELEX 02022R2065-20221027

A core part of the online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online, including to facilitate the search of relevant information for recipients of the service and contribute to an improved user experience. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, online platforms should consistently ensure that recipients of their service are appropriately informed about how recommender systems impact the way information is displayed, and can influence how information is presented to them. They should clearly present the parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients of the service understand how information is prioritised for them. Those parameters should include at least the most important criteria in determining the information suggested to the recipient of the service and the reasons for their respective importance, including where information is prioritised based on profiling and their online behaviour.

Related across sources

C-203/22 CK v Magistrat der Stadt Wien In Case C-203/22, the Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted Article 15(1)(h) of the GDPR in response to a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien… CJEU ·First Chamber Feb 27, 2025 Profiling Automated Decision-Making Marketing
C-422/24 Case C-422/24 - AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik. A new page has been created with the following information: "" CJEU Jan 7, 2026 Personal Data Fairness & Transparency Controllers
C-154/21 RW v Österreichische Post AG The Court of Justice of the European Union (First Chamber), in response to a preliminary reference from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrian Supreme Court), interpreted Article… CJEU ·First Chamber Jan 12, 2023 Right of Access Personal Data Recipient
C-579/21 Proceedings brought by J.M In Case C-579/21, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on a preliminary reference from the Itä-Suomen hallinto-oikeus (Administrative Court of Eastern Finland)… CJEU ·First Chamber Jun 22, 2023 Right of Access Personal Data Right to Restriction
CJEU Bavarian Lager: Disclosing personal data in access-to-documents requests is Processing: Communication of personal data in response to a request for access to documents constitutes processing. (¶69) Jun 29, 2010 Personal Data Legitimate Interest Right to Restriction