European governments are renewing pressure to scale back industrial AI rules rather than expand regulatory demands.
Ten countries, including Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland, have urged the EU to clarify how the AI Act overlaps with machinery law and to adopt more realistic implementation deadlines. Their position is even more surprising, given that the legislation already outlines its relationship with existing industrial frameworks.
Parliament’s centre and centre-right groups are pushing for deeper cuts. The European People’s Party wants all industrial sectors to move to a lighter regime, while Renew is advocating broad exemptions for industrial and business-to-business AI.
The European Conservatives and Reformers are also seeking reductions for non-safety-related systems. Together, the three groups edge close to a parliamentary majority, signalling momentum for a broader deregulation push.
No sweeping changes have been added to the AI omnibus so far, yet policymakers expect more adjustments ahead. The package must be finalised by August, so legislators are focused on meeting the deadline instead of reopening primary debates.
Broader revisions to industrial AI rules are likely to reappear in the Commission’s forthcoming Digital Fitness Check, which will reassess how multiple EU tech laws interact.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Japan’s Fair Trade Commission has launched an investigation into Microsoft in Tokyo over suspected antitrust violations. Authorities conducted an on-site inspection of Microsoft’s Japanese subsidiary in Tokyo on Wednesday, according to sources.
Regulators are examining whether Microsoft charged higher licensing fees to customers running Microsoft 365 and Windows on rival cloud platforms rather than on Microsoft Azure. The inquiry centres on concerns that software dominance may have restricted competition in Japan’s cloud market.
Microsoft’s Japanese unit said it would cooperate fully with the Fair Trade Commission in Tokyo. The watchdog is assessing whether pricing practices unfairly hindered rivals such as Amazon and Google, which also compete in Japan’s expanding cloud sector.
Japan’s Fair Trade Commission has intensified oversight of major technology firms in recent years. Previous actions in Japan include investigations into Amazon Japan and a 2025 order requiring Google to end certain preinstallation practices.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Samsung Electronics has unveiled the Galaxy S26 series, featuring advanced AI experiences, powerful performance, and an industry-leading camera system designed to simplify everyday smartphone tasks.
The series, which includes the Galaxy S26, S26+, and S26 Ultra, handles complex processes in the background, allowing users to focus on results rather than device operations.
The Galaxy S26 Ultra introduces the world’s first built-in Privacy Display, a redesigned chipset, and improved thermal management. Together, these upgrades enhance AI performance, graphics, and CPU efficiency, while ensuring faster, cooler, and more reliable operation throughout the day.
Photography and videography are also upgraded with wider apertures, Nightography Video, Super Steady video, and AI-powered editing tools that make professional-quality content accessible to all users.
Galaxy AI streamlines daily experiences by proactively suggesting actions, organising information, and automating tasks. Features such as Now Nudge, Now Brief, Circle to Search, and upgraded Bixby allow users to interact naturally with their devices.
Integrated AI agents, including Gemini and Perplexity, support multi-step tasks across apps, from booking services to advanced searches, all with minimal input.
Samsung has embedded multiple layers of security and privacy in the Galaxy S26 series. From AI-powered Call Screening and Privacy Alerts to Knox Vault, Knox Matrix, and post-quantum cryptography, users can control data access and protect personal information.
With long-term security updates, seamless software, and Galaxy Buds4 integration, the S26 series aims to combine performance, convenience, and safety in a single, intuitive device.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The Italian data protection authority has ordered Amazon Italia Logistics to halt processing of sensitive employee data after investigators found that the company gathered details ranging from health conditions to union involvement.
Information about workers’ private lives and family members had also been collected, often retained for a decade through internal tracking systems rather than being limited to what labour rules in Italy allow.
Regulators discovered that some data originated from cameras positioned near restrooms and staff break areas, a practice that breached EU privacy standards.
The watchdog concluded that the company’s monitoring went far beyond what employers are permitted to compile when assessing staff performance or workplace needs.
Amazon responded by stressing that protecting employee information remains a priority and said that internal rules and training programmes are designed to ensure compliance. The company added that any findings from the Italian authority would prompt a review of its procedures instead of being dismissed.
An order that arrives as Amazon attempts to regain its lobby badges at the European Parliament.
Access was suspended in 2024 after senior representatives declined to attend hearings on warehouse working conditions, and opposition from MEPs continues to place pressure on Parliament President Roberta Metsola to reject reinstatement.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Regulatory scrutiny of the EU’s digital fairness framework is set to begin on 1 July as the European Commission moves to tighten its supervision of online platforms.
The Commission is preparing a major upgrade of its consumer protection framework, expected by December 2026.
The reforms aim to reinforce enforcement tools under the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation, allowing regulators to intervene more effectively when platforms breach fairness standards.
Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy, Justice and Rule of Law, has highlighted the need for greater transparency and accountability as digital markets expand rapidly.
The forthcoming scrutiny focuses on ensuring that platforms respect transparency obligations, avoid manipulating users and provide fair conditions in online transactions.
Regulators seek to replace fragmented enforcement with a more coordinated model that reflects the increasingly cross-border nature of digital commerce.
Stronger consumer safeguards are becoming central to the digital agenda of the EU.
The next phase of reforms is expected to streamline investigations across member states and deliver more predictable outcomes for affected consumers, offering steadier enforcement instead of reactive measures taken after violations escalate.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has clarified that many crypto-perpetual contracts, including those for Bitcoin and Ether, are likely to be classified as contracts for difference (CFDs).
Due to their leverage, complexity, and risk, these products should target a narrow audience, with distribution strategies aligned accordingly.
The announcement came as Kraken launched perpetual futures for ten tokenised assets, including major indices, gold, and top tech and crypto stocks. ESMA warned that mass marketing or promotions targeting inexperienced investors are inappropriate under its guidance.
Firms must ensure that derivatives falling within the CFD category comply with product intervention requirements. Requirements include leverage limits, risk warnings, margin close-outs, negative balance protection, and a ban on incentives or benefits.
Non-advised services must include an appropriateness assessment to protect investors from unsuitable offerings.
ESMA also emphasised the importance of identifying and managing conflicts of interest arising from these products. The statement seeks to ensure firms market and distribute leveraged crypto products responsibly.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and xAI, has publicly accused Anthropic of stealing large volumes of data to train its AI models. The allegation was made on X in response to posts referencing Community Notes attached to Anthropic-related content.
Musk claimed the company had engaged in large-scale data theft and suggested that it had paid multi-billion-dollar settlements. Those financial claims remain contested, and no official confirmation has been provided to substantiate the figures.
Anthropic is guilty of stealing training data at massive scale and has had to pay multi-billion dollar settlements for their theft. This is just a fact. https://t.co/EEtdsJQ1Op
Anthropic, known for developing the Claude AI model, was founded by former OpenAI employees and promotes an approach centred on AI safety and responsible development. The company has not publicly responded to Musk’s latest accusations.
The dispute reflects a broader conflict across the AI industry over how companies collect the text, images and other materials required to train large language models. Much of this data is scraped from the internet, often without explicit permission from rights holders.
Multiple lawsuits filed by authors, media organisations and software developers are testing whether large-scale scraping qualifies as fair use under copyright law. Court rulings in these cases could reshape licensing practices, impose financial penalties, and alter the economics of AI development.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The first enforcement provisions of the EU AI Act entered into force on 2 February 2025, marking a turning point for Europe’s AI startup ecosystem. The initial phase targets ‘unacceptable risk’ systems, including social scoring, real-time biometric surveillance in public spaces, and manipulative AI practices.
Under the regulation, penalties can reach €35 million or 7% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher. Although the current enforcement covers only prohibited practices, the move signals that Europe’s AI rulebook is now operational rather than theoretical.
Broader obligations for high-risk AI systems, such as hiring tools, credit scoring, and medical diagnostics, will apply from August 2026. Separate rules for general-purpose AI models are scheduled to take effect in August 2025.
Surveys from European SME groups indicate that many smaller technology companies feel unprepared. A significant share of reports have not conducted formal risk classification of their AI systems, despite this being a foundational requirement under the EU AI Act’s tiered framework.
While some founders warn that compliance costs could slow innovation, others point to long-term benefits from clearer governance standards. For startups, the coming months will focus on aligning products with AI Act risk tiers and strengthening documentation and oversight before stricter rules apply.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office has fined Reddit £14.47 million after finding that the platform unlawfully used children’s personal information and failed to put in place adequate age checks.
Although Reddit updated its processes in July 2025, self-declaration remained easy to bypass, offering only a veneer of protection. Investigators also found that the company had not completed a data protection impact assessment until 2025, despite a large number of teenagers using the service.
Concerns were heightened by the volume of children affected and the risks created by relying on inadequate age checks.
The regulator noted that unlawful data processing occurred over a prolonged period, and that children were at risk of viewing harmful material while their information was processed without a lawful basis.
UK Information Commissioner John Edwards said companies must prioritise meaningful age assurance and understand the responsibilities set out in the Children’s Code.
The ICO said it will continue monitoring Reddit’s current controls and expects online platforms to align with robust age-assurance standards rather than rely on weak verification.
It will coordinate its oversight with Ofcom as part of broader efforts to strengthen online safety and ensure under-18s benefit from high privacy protections by default.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
In December 2025, the Macquarie Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and the American Dialect Society named ‘slop’ as the Word of the Year, reflecting a widespread reaction to AI-generated content online, often referred to as ‘AI slop.’ By choosing ‘slop’, typically associated with unappetising animal feed, they captured unease about the digital clutter created by AI tools.
As LLMs and AI tools became accessible to more people, many saw them as opportunities for profit through the creation of artificial content for marketing or entertainment, or through the manipulation of social media algorithms. However, despite video and image generation advances, there is a growing gap between perceived quality and actual detection: many overestimate how easily AI content evades notice, fueling scepticism about its online value.
As generative AI systems expand, the debate goes beyond digital clutter to deeper concerns about trust, market incentives, and regulatory resilience. How will societies manage the social, economic, and governance impacts of an information ecosystem increasingly shaped by automated abundance? In simplified terms, is AI slop more than a simple digital nuisance, or do we needlessly worry about a transient vogue that will eventually fade away?
The social aspect of AI slop’s influence
The most visible effects of AI slop emerge on large social media platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram. Users frequently encounter AI-generated images and videos that appropriate celebrity likenesses without consent, depict fabricated events, or present sensational and misleading scenarios. Comment sections often become informal verification spaces, where some users identify visual inconsistencies and warn others, while many remain uncertain about the content’s authenticity.
However, no platform has suffered the AI slop effect as much as Facebook, and once you take a glance at its demographics, the pieces start to come together. According to multiple studies, Facebook’s user base is mostly populated by adults aged 25-34, but users over the age of 55 make up nearly 24 percent of all users. While seniors do not constitute the majority (yet), younger generations have been steadily migrating to social platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and X, leaving the most popular platform to the whims of the older generation.
Due to factors such as cognitive decline, positivity bias, or digital (il)literacy, older social media users are more likely to fall for scams and fraud. Such conditions make Facebook an ideal place for spreading low-quality AI slop and false information. Scammers use AI tools to create fake images and videos about made-up crises to raise money for causes that are not real.
The lack of regulation on Meta’s side is the most glaring sore spot, evidenced by the company pushing back against the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), viewing them as ‘overreaching‘ and stifling innovation. The math is simple: content generates engagement, resulting in more revenue for Facebook and other platforms owned by Meta. Whether that content is authentic and high-quality or low-effort AI slop, the numbers don’t care.
The economics behind AI slop
At its core, AI content is not just a social media phenomenon, but an economic one as well. GenAI tools drastically reduce the cost and time required to produce all types of content, and when production approaches zero marginal cost, the incentive to churn out AI slop seems too good to ignore. Even minimal engagement can generate positive returns through advertising, affiliate marketing, or platform monetisation schemes.
AI content production goes beyond exploiting social media algorithms and monetisation policies. SEO can now be automated at scale, thus generating thousands of keyword-optimised articles within hours. Affiliate link farming allows creators to monetise their products or product recommendations with minimal editorial input.
On video platforms like TikTok and YouTube, synthetic voice-overs and AI-generated visuals are on full display, banking on trending topics and using AI-generated thumbnails to garner more views on a whim. Thanks to AI tools, content creators can post relevant AI-generated content in minutes, enabling them to jump on the hottest topics and drive clicks faster than with any other authentic content creation method.
To add salt to the wound, YouTube content creators share the sentiment that they are victims of the platform’s double standards in enforcing its strict community guidelines. Even the largest YouTube Channels are often flagged for a plethora of breaches, including copyright claims and depictions of dangerous or illegal activities, and harmful speech, to name a few. On the other hand, AI slop videos seem to fly under YouTube’s radar, leading to more resentment towards AI-generated content.
Businesses that rely on generative AI tools to market their services online are also finding AI to be the way to go, as most users are still not too keen on distinguishing authentic content, nor do they give much importance to those aspects. Instead of paying voice-over artists and illustrators, it is way cheaper to simply create a desired post in under a few minutes, adding fuel to an already raging fire. Some might call it AI slop, but again, the numbers are what truly matter.
The regulatory challenge of AI slop
AI slop is not only a social and economic issue, but also a regulatory one. The problem is not a single AI-generated post that promotes harmful behaviour or misleading information, but the sheer scale of synthetic content entering digital platforms. When large volumes of low-value or deceptive material circulate on the web, they can distort information ecosystems and make moderation a tough challenge. Such a predicament shifts the focus from individual violations to broader systemic effects.
In the EU, the DSA requires very large online platforms to assess and mitigate the systemic risks linked to their services. While the DSA does not specifically target AI slop, its provisions on transparency, content recommendation algorithms, and risk mitigation could apply if AI content significantly affects public discourse or enables fraud. The challenge lies in defining when content volume prevails over quality control, becoming a systemic issue rather than isolated misuse.
Debates around labelling AI slop and transparency also play a large role. Policymakers and platforms have explored ways to flag AI-generated content throughout disclosures or watermarking. For example, OpenAI’s Sora generates videos with a faint Sora watermark, although it is hardly visible to an uninitiated user. Nevertheless, labelling alone may not address deeper concerns if recommendation systems continue to prioritise engagement above all else, with the issue not only being whether users know the content is AI-generated, but how such content is ranked, amplified, and monetised.
More broadly, AI slop highlights the limits of traditional content moderation. As generative tools make production faster and cheaper, enforcement systems may struggle to keep pace. Regulation, therefore, faces a structural question: can existing digital governance frameworks preserve information quality in an environment where automated content production continues to grow?
Building resilience in the era of AI slop
Humans are considered the most adaptable species on Earth, and for good reason. While AI slop has exposed weaknesses in platform design, monetisation models, and moderation systems, it may also serve as a catalyst for adaptation. Unless regulatory bodies unite under one banner and agree to ban AI content for good, it is safe to say that synthetic content is here to stay. However, sooner or later, systemic regulations will evolve to address this new AI craze and mitigate its negative effects.
The AI slop bubble is bound to burst at some point, as online users will come to favour meticulously crafted content – whether authentic or artificial over low-quality content. Consequently, incentives may also evolve along with content saturation, leading to a greater focus on quality rather than quantity. Advertisers and brands often prioritise credibility and brand safety, which could encourage platforms to refine their ranking systems to reward originality, reliability, and verified creators.
Transparency requirements, systemic risk assessments, and discussions around provenance disclosure mechanisms imply that governance is responding to the realities of generative AI. Instead of marking the deterioration of digital spaces, AI slop may represent a transitional phase in which platforms, policymakers, and users are challenged to adjust their expectations and norms accordingly.
Finally, the long-term outcome will depend entirely on whether innovation, market incentives, and governance structures can converge around information quality and resilience. In that sense, AI slop may ultimately function less as a permanent state of affairs and more as a stress test to separate the wheat from the chaff. In the upcoming struggle between user experience and generative AI tools, the former will have the final say, which is an encouraging thought.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
