Navigating misinformation and disinformation: How definition ambiguity limits the DSA's implementation

Abstract

Very large online platforms shape public discourse, raising concerns about the impact of misinformation and disinformation on democratic stability. The European Union responded with the Digital Services Act framework. However, its enforcement remains limited, partly due to conceptual ambiguities surrounding the concepts of misinformation and disinformation. This article investigates how definitional inconsistencies undermine the Digital Services Act’s (DSA) implementation. We analyzed 79 documents—including EU legislation, platform policies, fact-checking codes, and academic publications—to examine how key actors define these terms. We identified four key definitional criteria: content quality, intent, associated risk, and creation and dissemination techniques. Our findings reveal that these criteria reflect divergent institutional interests and result in fragmented definitions. This fragmentation generates critical risks, affecting freedom of expression, research, countermeasure design, intervention effectiveness, and impact assessment. We conclude by offering recommendations to support criteria-based definitions, improve risk evaluation, and reinforce the DSA's effectiveness in countering information disorders.