FAQEU DSA

DSA recommender transparency FAQ

Article 27 requires online platforms that use recommender systems to explain the main parameters in plain terms and describe user options to modify or influence them.

For designated very large online platforms and very large online search engines, Article 38 adds at least one recommender option for each system that is not based on profiling.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 25, 2026
Questions
4

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
4

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated Jul 25, 2026
Overview

This FAQ explains what the EU Digital Services Act expects when an online platform uses a : terms-and-conditions disclosure, in-interface choice where options exist, the extra VLOP/VLOSE non- option, and the records that help show the public explanation matches the live service.

Search this module

Find a question or answer quickly

4 of 4 questions
Question 1

What does DSA Article 27 require for recommender system transparency?

Article 27 applies to providers of online platforms that use recommender systems. The DSA defines a as a fully or partly automated system that suggests information, prioritises it, or determines the relative order or prominence of information in the platform interface.

The platform must set out, in its terms and conditions and in plain, intelligible language, the main parameters used by the and any options recipients have to modify or influence those parameters. Article 19 can exclude qualifying micro and small online-platform providers from Article 27, subject to the post-loss transition and the rule that designated VLOPs remain covered.

  • Identify every recommender surface: feed, search results, marketplace ordering, content suggestions, ranking modules, or other interface areas that suggest or prioritise information.
  • Describe the most significant criteria used to determine what information is suggested to a user.
  • Explain why those parameters have their relative importance; do not replace this with an unexplained formula, model name, or generic personalization statement.
  • List the user options that can modify or influence the main parameters, or state clearly when no such option is offered for that recommender surface.

Does the EU Digital Services Act require platforms to publish the full recommender algorithm?

No. Article 27 is framed around plain-language disclosure of the main parameters and user options, not publication of source code, model weights, or a technical formula. The explanation should let a recipient understand why certain information is suggested and which criteria matter most.

Citations
Question 2

What user controls must be available for DSA recommender choices?

Article 27 distinguishes between disclosure of options and in-product functionality. If several options are available for a that determines the relative order of information, the platform must let the recipient select and modify the preferred option at any time.

That control must be directly and easily accessible from the specific part of the online interface where information is being prioritised. A buried account setting is weak evidence if the ranking choice is presented somewhere else.

  • Map each terms-and-conditions option to the exact UI control where the recipient can select or change it.
  • Record whether the control changes ranking order, recommendation source, personalization settings, chronological ordering, popularity ordering, location, language, seller, or another main parameter.
  • Keep screenshots or product specs showing the control in the interface section where prioritised information appears.
  • Retest the disclosure after recommender releases, ranking-signal changes, UI redesigns, or changes to terms and conditions.

Under the DSA, is it enough to describe recommender settings only in a help article?

Article 27 specifically requires the main parameters and modification options to be set out in the terms and conditions. Help-centre or in-product text can make the explanation easier to find, but it should not replace the terms-and-conditions disclosure.

Citations
Question 3

What extra recommender choice applies to VLOPs and VLOSEs?

Article 38 adds a separate requirement for providers of very large online platforms and very large online search engines that use recommender systems. In addition to Article 27, they must provide at least one option for each that is not based on under the GDPR definition referenced by the DSA.

here means automated processing of personal data to evaluate personal aspects of a natural person, including analysis or prediction of interests, behaviour, location, or other listed characteristics. A provider should test the actual data and logic behind the option; a label such as 'chronological' or 'non-personalised' does not by itself establish that the option is not based on profiling.

The 45 million average-monthly-active-recipient threshold informs designation, but Article 38 applies after the Commission designates the service as a VLOP or VLOSE. For those designated services, the recommender inventory should show each and its matching non- option.

  • Confirm whether the service is designated as a VLOP or VLOSE before applying Article 38 as an extra obligation.
  • For each , identify the default option, any alternative options, and the option that is not based on .
  • Check that the non- choice is not limited to one surface if multiple recommender systems are used.
  • Keep product and legal sign-off that the option described as non- is implemented consistently in the live ranking service.

Do all DSA online platforms need a non- recommender option?

Article 38 creates the explicit non- option requirement for very large online platforms and very large online search engines that use recommender systems. Other online platforms using recommender systems still need the Article 27 disclosure of main parameters and any recipient options to modify or influence those parameters.

Citations
Question 4

What evidence should teams keep for DSA recommender transparency?

Keep evidence showing that the public disclosure, live user interface, and recommender implementation describe the same system. For VLOPs and VLOSEs, DSA risk assessment, mitigation, audit, and data-access provisions can require explanations of algorithmic-system design, logic, functioning, and testing.

Use the product's actual criteria and records rather than an assumed scoring formula: the criteria that matter most, why they have their relative importance, the UI choices available to recipients, and the releases that changed the disclosure.

  • Recommender inventory with surface name, owner, recipient group, ranking objective, main criteria, and whether the surface determines relative order or prominence.
  • Terms-and-conditions extract showing the Article 27 main-parameter explanation and the options to modify or influence those parameters.
  • UI screenshots, design specs, or QA evidence showing where each choice is directly available to recipients.
  • For VLOPs and VLOSEs, evidence for the Article 38 non- option for each and testing records for algorithmic changes.
  • Change log tying recommender releases, terms updates, and interface changes to legal, product, and data-science review.

What should a DSA recommender transparency review verify before launch?

Before launch, verify that the platform has identified the , described the most significant criteria and their relative importance in plain language, disclosed recipient options in the terms and conditions, exposed any required choice control in the relevant interface, and, for VLOPs or VLOSEs, provided a non- option for each recommender system.

Citations
Recommended next step

Turn Article 27 and Article 38 checks into a repeatable review

Sorena can help product, legal, trust and safety, and data science teams compare recommender disclosures, UI choices, release records, and VLOP/VLOSE evidence against the cited DSA sources.

Primary sources

References and citations

eur-lex.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Articles 34, 35, 38, 40, and 44 connect VLOP/VLOSE recommender systems to risk assessment, mitigation, data access, and choice-interface scrutiny.
"design, the logic"
Related guides

Explore more topics

DSA Ads and Recommender Systems: transparency duties, user choice, and evidence
An official source DSA guide to ad labels, targeting restrictions, recommender parameter disclosure, non-profiling options for VLOPs and VLOSEs, ad repositories, and compliance evidence.
DSA Applicability Test: classify intermediary services, platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs
A cited EU Digital Services Act applicability test for classifying intermediary services, hosting services, online platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs.
DSA Article 28 minors protection guide for online platforms
EU Digital Services Act guide to Article 28 minors protection: platform scope, child-safety measures, targeted ads limits, recommender controls, and official source evidence.
DSA average monthly active recipients: what platforms must publish
An official source FAQ on average monthly active recipients under the EU Digital Services Act, including publication, EU recipient scope, the 45 million VLOP/VLOSE threshold, and evidence records.
DSA Complaint and Dispute Workflows for Online Platforms
Build DSA complaint, appeal, statement-of-reasons, and out-of-court dispute workflows for online platform moderation decisions.
DSA crisis response for VLOPs and VLOSEs
EU Digital Services Act crisis response guide for VLOPs and VLOSEs: Article 36 Commission decisions, Article 48 crisis protocols, mitigation, governance, requests for information, and records.
DSA Dark Patterns: interface design checks for online platforms
Article 25 DSA guidance for reviewing online platform interfaces for deceptive, manipulative, or choice-distorting design patterns.
DSA Enforcement and Penalties in the EU
How Digital Services Act enforcement works: Commission and Digital Services Coordinator roles, VLOP and VLOSE investigations, fines, periodic penalty payments, and evidence readiness.
DSA illegal content notices: what must be included?
An official source FAQ on EU Digital Services Act illegal-content notices: Article 16 notice elements, acknowledgement, decision notices, trusted flagger priority, statements of reasons, and records.
DSA Marketplace Trader Traceability FAQ
Answer to what EU Digital Services Act Article 30 requires online marketplaces to collect, verify, display, retain, and evidence for trader traceability.
DSA Marketplace Trader Traceability Guide
EU Digital Services Act guide for online marketplaces collecting, checking, displaying, storing, and evidencing trader traceability information.
DSA notice and action plus statements of reasons guide
A source-cited Digital Services Act guide for notice intake, moderation decisions, statements of reasons, DSA Transparency Database submission, complaints, appeals, trusted flaggers, and records.
DSA Notice and Action Workflow for Hosting Services and Online Platforms
A source-cited DSA notice-and-action workflow covering notice intake, completeness checks, trusted flaggers, decisions, user communications, statements of reasons, appeals, and records.
DSA researcher data access for VLOPs and VLOSEs
Article 40 DSA guide to vetted researcher access for VLOPs and VLOSEs under Regulation (EU) 2025/2050: requests, data catalogues, security, deadlines, and records.
DSA service tier classifier for platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs
Classify a digital service under the EU Digital Services Act as intermediary, hosting, online platform, marketplace, VLOP or VLOSE, with EU recipient-count evidence and obligation outputs.
DSA statement of reasons FAQ
When DSA statements of reasons are required, what they must contain, when online platforms submit them to the DSA Transparency Database, and what appeal records to keep.
DSA statement of reasons log workflow for online platforms
Build a DSA statement of reasons log for moderation decisions, Transparency Database submission, complaint links, retention, and QA controls.
DSA transparency report template fields and cadence
A source-cited template outline for Digital Services Act transparency reports, covering applicable service tiers, reporting periods, CSV/XLSX format, retention, statement-of-reasons links, and required evidence tables.
DSA Transparency Reporting Obligations by Provider Tier
A source-cited guide to EU Digital Services Act transparency reports, active-recipient publication, statements-of-reasons submissions, VLOP/VLOSE reports, templates, cadence, and evidence.
DSA VLOP and VLOSE Risk Assessments and Mitigation Guide
A source-cited guide to Digital Services Act systemic risk assessments, mitigation measures, audits, transparency reports, data access, and governance evidence for VLOPs and VLOSEs.
DSA VLOP Audit Pack Workflow: Risk, Mitigation, Audit, and Transparency Records
Build a DSA VLOP or VLOSE audit pack covering Article 34 risk assessments, Article 35 mitigations, independent-audit evidence, transparency reports, data access, and compliance governance.
DSA VLOP Risk Assessment FAQ: Article 34, Mitigation, Audits
What VLOPs and VLOSEs must assess under the EU Digital Services Act, when to reassess, how Article 35 mitigation and annual audit evidence fit together, and what records to keep.
DSA vs DMA Platform Rules
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act by scope, designation thresholds, obligations, enforcement, evidence, and practical team ownership.
DSA vs GDPR: online-platform governance and personal-data obligations
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and EU GDPR by scope, ads, recommenders, minors, transparency, complaints, enforcement, and evidence.
DSA vs P2B Regulation: EU platform obligations compared
Compare the EU Digital Services Act with the Platform-to-Business Regulation for platform scope, business-user terms, content moderation, ranking transparency, complaints, enforcement, and evidence.
DSA vs Terrorist Content Online Regulation: notice-and-action vs removal orders
Compare DSA content-governance duties with the EU Terrorist Content Online Regulation removal-order workflow for scope, timing, evidence, authorities, and team ownership.
EU Digital Services Act checklist for platforms and hosting services
An official source DSA checklist for classifying service tiers, notice-and-action, statements of reasons, complaints, transparency reports, ads, recommenders, trader traceability, VLOP/VLOSE duties, and evidence records.
EU Digital Services Act Compliance Guide
DSA compliance guide for intermediary services, hosting providers, online platforms, marketplaces, and VLOP/VLOSE teams: obligations, controls, and evidence to keep.
EU Digital Services Act FAQ: DSA scope, platform duties, VLOPs, reports, and penalties
Concise EU Digital Services Act FAQ covering intermediary-service scope, active-recipient thresholds, illegal-content notices, statements of reasons, trader traceability, recommender transparency, systemic-risk duties, reporting, penalties, and complaints.
EU Digital Services Act penalties and fines: caps and enforcement roles
DSA penalty caps and enforcement roles: Member State fines, Commission fines for VLOPs and VLOSEs, 1% procedural fines, and 5% periodic penalty payments.
EU Digital Services Act requirements by service tier
Overview of DSA obligations for intermediary services, hosting providers, online platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs, including notices, complaints, ads, transparency reports, audits, data access and enforcement.
EU Digital Services Act service types and scope
Classify DSA service scope across mere conduit, caching, hosting, online platforms, marketplaces, online search engines, and VLOP/VLOSE threshold duties.
EU DSA deadlines and compliance calendar: application dates, reporting cycles, and VLOP clocks
Calendar view of cited EU Digital Services Act dates: full application, user-number publication, VLOP/VLOSE designation clocks, statements of reasons, and transparency reporting cycles.
EU DSA Transparency Calendar: reporting, SoR database, AMAR updates
Build a DSA transparency calendar for annual reports, statement-of-reasons database submissions, active-recipient updates, and VLOP/VLOSE audit touchpoints.
EU DSA vs UK Online Safety Act: scope, duties, regulator, and evidence
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and UK Online Safety Act for platform scope, risk assessments, child protection, transparency, regulators, enforcement, and owners.