“We urgently need transparency to mitigate the risks — and unlock the upside — of social media monetization.”
Published: November 3, 2025
On 13 October, 2025, WHAT TO FIX Policy Lead Sarah Murphy Madia addressed the European Parliament’s Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield (EUDS).
🎬 Watch video [timestamps: 15:24:43 - 14:35:05]
Sarah’s intervention came as a follow up to WHAT TO FIX Executive Director Victoire Rio’s contribution to the European Parliament’s July hearing on Generative AI and Democracy.
In her remarks, Sarah raised concerns over platforms’ reckless rollout of monetization services. She emphasized the need for greater scrutiny and oversight and outlined WHAT TO FIX’s recommendations for enhanced monetization transparency.
The Urgent Need for Social Media Monetization Transparency
Social media platforms have been capturing a growing share of the advertising market, reporting double digit ad revenue growth year over year, at the expense of authentic publishers, media and creators.
While platforms redistribute a small portion of their ad revenue via revenue redistribution programs, the absence of transparency around the rollout of their monetization services presents a major threat to information integrity and democracy.
Increased precarity of authentic content production
Not only are platforms redistributing minimal amounts, but access to revenue is also subject to platforms’ monetization terms, which overwhelmingly favor platforms. Platforms determine payout amounts and can restrict access at any time, for any reason, without financial compensation. Revenue uncertainty increases the precarity of authentic content production, with media and minority creators — whose publishing is most likely to touch on political and social issues — most at risk of over-enforcement, and, in turn, self-censorship.
Incentivizing — and financing — harmful content and activity
Most alarmingly, platforms’ heavy reliance on automated monetization review processes not only fuels over- but also under-enforcement, with platforms regularly rewarding content and actors that actively violate their own terms and policies. Engagement-based payouts incentivize inauthentic activity, while access to financing supports the scaling of such activity as well as offer revenue streams to political actors and actors otherwise engaged in illicit activity.
WHAT TO FIX’s Transparency Proposals
At WHAT TO FIX, we’re advocating for increased monetization transparency at four levels:
On-Platform Labeling
Platforms should disclose the monetization status of each account in their “about” sections.
Just as users deserve to know when they are being targeted by advertising, we believe that users should have access to information on whether the actors and content they interact with are being rewarded financially.
Monetization Archives
Platforms should maintain searchable monetization archives, consolidating all of the accounts that have been benefiting from their monetization services.
As with ad archives, we believe that monetization archives are necessary to enable independent research and oversight. Researchers should be able to review benefiting parties and their period of enrollment to assess the impact of platforms’ monetization services on systemic risks. Regulators, meanwhile, should be able to ensure platforms’ compliance with existing laws and regulations — including rules around business due diligence, fund transfers, and taxation.
WHAT TO FIX prototyped a monetization archive for Facebook and Instagram, drawing on 6 years of Meta's archived partner publisher lists. Our prototype focuses on Meta as the only company to currently disclose membership in its revenue redistribution programs. Future archives should include information on financial beneficiaries and revenue earned.
Transparency Reports
Platforms should expand their transparency reports to integrate information on the enforcement of their monetization terms and policies.
Monetization restrictions and appeals
Platforms should disclose the number of monetization restrictions enforced in a given period, as well as the number of appeals received and decisions reversed as a result of these appeals.
Share of violations associated with monetized accounts
Platforms should augment their existing content policy, intellectual property and local law restriction reports by disclosing the share of violations associated with accounts who were earning money via their own monetization services.
Transparency Centers
In addition to expanding transparency around their monetization enforcement, platforms should disclose information about their monetization governance — including their monetization terms and policies and a high level description of their enforcement processes — as part of their transparency centers.
(slides available here)
SEO
WHAT TO FIX Urges Transparency into Social Media Monetization in Exchange of Views with European Parliament
EU Democracy Shield: WHAT TO FIX’s recommendations to the European Parliament
Issue Brief: New Incentives, Evolving Threats
WHAT TO FIX’s Submission to the European Board on Digital Services’ First Annual Report On Systemic Risks
Monetization Principles: Paving the Way towards Responsible Monetization Governance
WHAT TO FIX’s Submission To The DSA’s Article 40 Delegated Act