An empirical critique of the DSA Transparency Database: mapping shortcomings and levers for improvement

The EU Digital Services Act (DSA) leans heavily on transparency obligations in pursuit of a ‘safe, predictable and trusted online environment’ (Article 1(1)). The present paper critically assesses the product of one DSA transparency obligation in particular: the ‘DSA Transparency Database’ (TDB), to which online platforms must submit an explanation for most content moderation decisions they take. As Recital 66 elucidates, its multifaceted objective entails ensuring transparency and enabling scrutiny over platforms’ content moderation decisions and tracking the spread of illegal content online. Through empirical inquiry into eight leading platforms’ submissions to the TDB, this paper maps the flaws that impede the TDB’s effectiveness, stemming from both database architecture and the underlying normative framework. By extension, this paper explores whether Implementing Regulation 2024/2835, adopted to standardise transparency reporting under the DSA, improves the TDB’s informativeness. The analysis concludes by stressing the importance of granularity in deriving meaningful insights from data.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Information & Communications Technology Law
Published
2026-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2026.2712191
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
40.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

An empirical critique of the DSA Transparency Database: mapping shortcomings and levers for improvement

Eline Leijten
1 citations
Information & Communications Technology Law
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
40.44
article

An empirical critique of the DSA Transparency Database: mapping shortcomings and levers for improvement

Eline Leijten
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The EU Digital Services Act (DSA) leans heavily on transparency obligations in pursuit of a ‘safe, predictable and trusted online environment’ (Article 1(1)). The present paper critically assesses the product of one DSA transparency obligation in particular: the ‘DSA Transparency Database’ (TDB), to which online platforms must submit an explanation for most content moderation decisions they take. As Recital 66 elucidates, its multifaceted objective entails ensuring transparency and enabling scrutiny over platforms’ content moderation decisions and tracking the spread of illegal content online. Through empirical inquiry into eight leading platforms’ submissions to the TDB, this paper maps the flaws that impede the TDB’s effectiveness, stemming from both database architecture and the underlying normative framework. By extension, this paper explores whether Implementing Regulation 2024/2835, adopted to standardise transparency reporting under the DSA, improves the TDB’s informativeness. The analysis concludes by stressing the importance of granularity in deriving meaningful insights from data.

Information & Communications Technology Law
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Freedom of Expression and Defamation
40.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.