Brussels is turning up the pressure on those who manipulate public opinion and weaponize falsehoods. Disinformation, EU officials warn, has become a direct threat to democratic systems, eroding trust in institutions and destabilizing public debate. And the problem is growing fast.
A new Digital Poland 2024 report shows that 84% of Poles encountered fake news last year, and nearly every respondent admitted to believing at least one fabricated story. Against this backdrop, calls for stronger European action are intensifying.
“This isn’t about restricting free speech—it’s about building defenses against aggressive activism and empowering independent fact-checking,” argues Financial Times journalist Gillian Tett, urging support for new anti-disinformation tools.
Philanthropist and social activist Robert Szustkowski, who launched a European initiative to extend the Right to Be Forgotten to media outlets, speaks in similar terms. With disinformation accelerating, he says, Europe must invest both in legal protections and in high-quality journalism.
His appeal resonates with a recent ruling by Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court, which confirmed that the GDPR’s Right to Be Forgotten is a legitimate basis for demanding removal of personal data from digital media archives. “Only responsible journalism can fill the vacuum now dominated by unregulated social media,” Szustkowski stresses.
A Country Flooded with Fakes
Fake news has become part of everyday reality in Poland. According to DigitalPoland, the top sources of disinformation include social media (55%), television (53%), statements by politicians (52%), all amplified by interpersonal sharing (59%).
Poles know the danger: 73% believe the goal of fake news is manipulation, and most want both platforms (58%) and the government (51%) to intervene—even if that means limiting some aspects of free speech. “Falsehoods hide everywhere—articles, videos, audio clips, social media posts. AI makes this easier than ever,” warns the European Parliament Office in Poland (Interia.pl, 14.11.2025).
Across Europe, the numbers paint a similar picture:
- 83% believe disinformation threatens democracy,
- 63% of young people see fake news at least once a week,
- 51% think they’ve already been victims of online manipulation.
A New Framework for an Old Problem
Szustkowski’s initiative—already acknowledged by European Commission officials—seeks to modernize the legal architecture governing digital content. His proposal includes:
- extending the Right to Be Forgotten to media outlets that act as data controllers,
- creating a register of personal rights violations,
- establishing a Reader’s Rights Ombudsman to help victims of online lies navigate the complaints process.
These ideas align with wider EU efforts. Fact-checking is being systematized through EDMO (European Digital Media Observatory) hubs across member states. At the same time, the Digital Services Act (DSA) obliges major platforms to: remove illegal content, curb viral disinformation, provide transparent reporting mechanisms.
Under the DSA framework, citizens can demand the removal of unlawful content through official administrative procedures.
Meanwhile, a definitive ruling from the Supreme Administrative Court adds legal weight, confirming that outdated or unnecessary personal data in digital media archives should be erased when requested.
AI: The New Frontline of Disinformation
While legal tools evolve, the threat itself is rapidly changing shape. Artificial intelligence has become the newest, most powerful instrument in the disinformation arsenal.
AI-driven software can generate deepfakes, synthetic voices, and lifelike bots in seconds—making falsehoods more convincing and harder to detect. “AI speeds up the production of manipulated content that distorts reality and destroys reputations,” warns Wojciech Głażewski, director of Check Point Software Technologies in Poland.
Experts agree on the remedy: rigorous source verification, cross-checking against official statements, and the introduction of standardized newsroom fact-checking procedures—the same protective mechanisms outlined in Szustkowski’s proposal to the European Commission.
