Overview
This report provides an analysis of Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and European Commission answers published between Monday, 12 January 2026 and Sunday, 18 January 2026. The exchanges focus heavily on the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly concerning Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs), online marketplaces, and the mitigation of systemic risks like disinformation and harmful AI-generated content. Other key policy areas addressed include the implementation of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), data protection under the GDPR, and the security of digital infrastructure. The Commission’s responses consistently project a posture of active monitoring and enforcement, emphasising its procedural powers and ongoing investigations into major platforms. These developments are critical for public and government affairs professionals tracking the transition from digital policymaking to concrete regulatory supervision and enforcement across the EU.
DSA Enforcement & Platform Accountability
❗ Commission Outlines DSA Enforcement on Online Marketplaces like AliExpress, Temu, and Shein
In a reply dated 16 January 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen detailed the Commission’s active monitoring of VLOP marketplaces’ compliance with the Digital Services Act. The answer to question E-004473/25 confirms that while specific liability rules were discarded in favour of due diligence obligations, proceedings have been opened against AliExpress, Temu, and Shein. The Commission highlighted accepted commitments from AliExpress on trader traceability and noted that ongoing customs controls and the upcoming European Product Act will further strengthen the enforcement framework.
❗ Commission Confirms DSA Supervision of Telegram Falls to Belgian Regulator
Executive Vice-President Virkkunen, in a response on 16 January 2026 to question E-004541/25, clarified the regulatory status of Telegram under the Digital Services Act. The Commission stated that Telegram has reported user numbers below the 45 million threshold for VLOP designation, but it continues to monitor these figures. As Telegram’s legal representative is in Belgium, the Belgian Digital Services Coordinator is competent for supervising the platform’s compliance with applicable DSA obligations, including powers to request temporary service restrictions from a judicial authority in cases of serious harm.
❗ Commission Details DSA Safeguards for Freedom of Expression and Media Content
Responding to concerns about content moderation, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen stated on 13 January 2026 that the Digital Services Act protects users against over-removal of lawful content through transparency and appeal mechanisms. The answer to question E-004335/25 affirms the Commission is monitoring VLOPs’ compliance with systemic risk assessments, regardless of users’ political views. It also highlighted that since the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) entered into force, VLOPs must provide media service providers with a statement of reasons and a 24-hour window to reply before restricting their content.
❗ Commission Cites Ongoing Investigations into Online Marketplaces and Consumer Protection
In a 8 January 2026 answer to question E-004369/25 regarding problems with online sales from outside the EU, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen reiterated that online consumer protection is a priority. The Commission is actively monitoring VLOPs like Shein, Temu, and AliExpress under the DSA, with ongoing investigations into Temu and AliExpress that are broader than recent national findings of illegal content. The response also notes parallel investigations into Temu and Shein for potential breaches of EU consumer law and highlights upcoming revisions to the Market Surveillance Regulation and the EU customs reform to strengthen enforcement.
❗ Commission Highlights DSA Ad Transparency Rules in Response to Facebook/Instagram Concerns
Executive Vice-President Virkkunen, on 14 January 2026, outlined the Digital Services Act’s requirements for advertising transparency on online platforms. In response to question E-004506/2025, the Commission noted that platforms must provide information on who paid for an ad and the parameters used for targeting. It also referenced its preliminary findings that Facebook and Instagram may have failed to provide a user-friendly notice and action mechanism and highlighted the obligation for VLOPs to maintain public ad repositories to facilitate research and scrutiny.
❓ MEP Presses Commission on DSA Enforcement Regarding Grok AI and Deepfakes
Nina Carberry (PPE) submitted a priority question (P-000088/2026) on 13 January 2026, asking if the Commission will open formal DSA proceedings against social media platform X over its Grok AI chatbot. The question cites a UK investigation into the creation of deepfake sexual images, including of children, and asks the Commission to confirm it will use its full enforcement powers, including potential service suspensions, to address breaches related to child sexual abuse material. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEPs Raise Concerns Over AI-Generated Disinformation on TikTok in Poland
In a question filed on 9 January 2026 (E-000055/2026), Krzysztof Brejza (PPE) highlighted the large-scale dissemination of AI-generated Polish-language videos on TikTok calling for Poland’s withdrawal from the EU. The MEP asks what supervisory measures the Commission will take to ensure TikTok complies with its DSA obligations on systemic risk mitigation and whether it is considering a formal investigation into the platform’s practices for addressing coordinated disinformation campaigns. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEP Questions Effectiveness of DSA Reporting Channels and Dispute Settlement
Pascal Arimont (PPE) asked the Commission on 6 January 2026 about the practical enforcement of DSA user rights, citing a report from HateAid. Question E-000017/2026 seeks information on the steps the Commission is taking to ensure VLOPs provide user-friendly reporting channels, how it enforces rules on automated decision-making, and whether it plans to introduce guidelines for out-of-court dispute settlement bodies. A response from the Commission is awaited.
Media Freedom & Pluralism
❗ Commission Affirms Commitment to Media Freedom and Outlines Support Initiatives
In a 15 January 2026 response to question E-004498/25, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen detailed several initiatives to support the media sector. The Commission highlighted the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) as providing unprecedented safeguards for media independence. It also mentioned the proposed AgoraEU programme to boost funding, a new Media Resilience Programme, and an ongoing evaluation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. The Commission also confirmed it is investigating the impact of AI on the media sector through its enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), including a probe into Google’s use of publisher content in its AI products.
❗ Commission Reasserts Importance of Media Freedom and EMFA Implementation
On 15 January 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen responded to question E-004453/25 by stating that the Commission attaches the utmost importance to media freedom as guaranteed by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The answer emphasizes that the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which began applying in August 2025, provides significant safeguards against political interference and surveillance. The Commission noted its priority is ensuring the EMFA’s correct implementation but declined to comment on individual cases.
❓ MEP Questions Commission’s Role in French Media Acquisition Under EMFA
Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew) submitted a question on 8 January 2026 (E-000043/2026) concerning the acquisition of the magazine Challenges by LVMH in France. Citing concerns about media concentration, the MEP asks if France has referred the matter to the Commission under the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), whether the Commission will refer it to the European Board for Media Services, and how it will coordinate EMFA application with merger control rules. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEP Proposes Proportional Funding Model for EU Media Support
In a question dated 7 January 2026 (E-000024/2026), Catherine Griset (PfE) raised concerns that Commission-led funding for media under the future European Democracy Shield could lead to censorship of opposition outlets. The MEP asks if the Commission would consider a model where European media funding is determined by parliamentarians of each Member State on a proportional basis to democratise the mechanism. A response is awaited.
❗ Commission Confirms Monitoring of Meta’s AI Chatbots Under DSA Risk Rules
In response to question E-004520/25, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen confirmed on 15 January 2026 that VLOPs like Facebook and Instagram must assess and mitigate systemic risks from their services, including those posed by AI features. The Commission stated it is Meta’s responsibility to comply with the DSA’s risk assessment obligations, which cover impacts on fundamental rights and civic discourse. While the Commission is monitoring Meta’s overall DSA compliance, it has not investigated any specific internal guidelines for its AI chatbots at this stage.
❓ MEPs Flag Privacy Risks of AI Chat Data Harvesting by Browser Extensions
Nicolás González Casares (S&D) and Laura Ballarín Cereza (S&D) submitted a question on 9 January 2026 (E-000056/2026) regarding a cybersecurity report that found browser extensions were secretly collecting users’ AI chat conversations. They ask the Commission if this practice breaches EU data protection and AI frameworks, what measures will be taken to enforce platform policies on digital marketplaces, and whether specific regulatory guidance is planned to address these privacy risks. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEP Asks if Commission Will Use AI for Asylum Seeker Age Verification
Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE), in a question dated 5 January 2026 (E-000012/2026), pointed to national data showing a significant number of asylum seekers falsely claiming to be minors. Citing UK plans to use AI and facial recognition for age estimation, the MEP asks if the Commission collects EU-level statistics on age disputes, if it will propose minimum EU standards for age assessment, and whether it intends to integrate AI into these checks. A response is awaited.
❗ Commission Details Action Plan for Submarine Cable Security
On 15 January 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen responded to question E-004479/25 regarding the security of submarine cables. The Commission outlined its Action Plan on Cable Security, noting that project proposals for regional cable hubs are expected in 2026 to improve detection and repair. The response details plans for pilot calls under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) Digital programme and the Digital Europe Programme to support modular repair equipment, smart cable systems, and projects of European interest, ensuring collaboration between Member States, EU agencies, NATO, and private partners.
❓ MEP Questions Legality of Public Real-Time Geolocation Data in Spain Under GDPR
Alvise Pérez (NI) asked the Commission on 5 January 2026 about a Spanish system that makes the real-time geolocation of broken-down vehicles publicly available on a web map. Question E-000006/2026 queries whether this is consistent with the GDPR, if the claim of anonymisation is sufficient given the risks, and whether such processing requires a data protection impact assessment and restricted access. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEP Asks Commission to Consider Open-Source AI Proposals
Catherine Griset (PfE) submitted a question on 8 January 2026 (E-000047/2026) referencing an open letter from the open-source community that advocates for making open-source AI a priority for EU sovereignty. The question lists five proposals from the letter, including creating an ‘EU Sovereign Tech Fund’ and facilitating access to computing infrastructure and public data. The MEP asks if the Commission’s recent call for evidence will take these proposals into account. A response is awaited.
❗ Commission Addresses Impact of Discontinued NIH Funding for EU Researchers
In a 15 January 2026 answer to question E-004547/25, Commissioner Zaharieva acknowledged that the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) decision to discontinue foreign subawards will impact EU-based organisations. However, the Commission noted that the NIH continues to support EU entities through direct awards and that no specific ad hoc mechanism is foreseen to compensate for the loss, as Horizon Europe funding is awarded competitively. The response reaffirmed the EU’s strategic interest in international cooperation on global health issues and the eligibility of US entities for exceptional funding in certain Horizon Europe projects.
❓ MEPs Inquire About EU Strategy for Media Freedom in Lebanon
A cross-party group of MEPs led by Leoluca Orlando (Verts/ALE) asked the Vice-President / High Representative on 23 December 2025 about the protection of journalists in Lebanon. Question E-005059/2025 cites reports of intimidation and misuse of criminal defamation laws and asks about the EU’s strategy to encourage better provisions for freedom of expression and how it is shaping its partnership with Lebanon to protect journalists, in the spirit of the EMFA. A response is pending.
❗ Commission Defends AVMSD Framework for Protecting Minors
On 14 January 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen responded to question E-004306/25 about the protection of minors from harmful audiovisual content. The Commission stated that under the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), enforcement is primarily a competence of national regulatory authorities. It confirmed it is closely monitoring the AVMSD’s implementation and that an ongoing evaluation will assess if more should be done to protect minors, while respecting fundamental rights like freedom of expression.
❓ MEP Questions Legal Basis of Intersecting EU Electoral Rules
Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE) submitted a question on 5 January 2026 (E-000014/2026) arguing that the ‘patchwork’ of EU rules on elections—including the DSA and rules on political advertising—undermines the legal certainty of national constitutional frameworks. The MEP asks for the legal basis for this expansion of EU rules, how the Commission ensures they do not undermine Member State sovereignty, and whether it is considering revising them. A response is pending.
❓ MEP Raises Data Privacy Concerns Over Commission Questionnaire for Children
In a question filed on 18 December 2025 (E-005004/2025), Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE) questioned the legal basis and data protection safeguards for a Commission questionnaire for children aged 8-17 as part of the European Child Guarantee. The MEP raises concerns about questions on gender and LGBTQI+ identity, which constitute sensitive data, and asks about parental consent, anonymity safeguards, and respect for Member State competences in education. A response is awaited.
Based on the Commission’s answers from this period, a clear focus on active enforcement and regulatory supervision of major digital legislation emerges. The Commission consistently positions itself as a diligent monitor of the digital market, frequently referencing ongoing proceedings, requests for information, and systemic risk assessments under the Digital Services Act (DSA). This suggests a deliberate shift from legislative development to the practical realities of compliance and enforcement, particularly for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) in e-commerce and social media.
Furthermore, the Commission’s responses indicate a holistic and interconnected view of its digital regulatory toolkit. Answers repeatedly link the DSA with other legal frameworks, including the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), consumer protection law, and even future legislation like the European Product Act and revised customs rules. This integrated approach frames individual enforcement actions not as isolated events, but as part of a comprehensive strategy to ensure safety, fairness, and the protection of fundamental rights across the entire digital single market.
Finally, the institutional tone is one of procedural correctness and adherence to its legal mandate. The Commission details its powers, the competencies of national Digital Services Coordinators, and the specific articles of legislation it is enforcing. This framing underscores its role as an evidence-based regulator acting within established legal boundaries, a posture that likely aims to reinforce its authority and neutrality in supervising a complex and politically sensitive policy area.
All Parliamentary Questions and Commission Answers are accessible via Policy-Insider.AI.
