Why we should worry about Google’s stopping serving political advertising in EU

Google has announced its withdrawal from political advertising in the EU, starting in October 2025. This decision slipped under the radar due to the turmoil of the US election and the EU's struggle to form a new commission — but it could prove deeply consequential for people’s ability to access information online or engage in political discussion.

The decision is especially concerning for civil society organizations, as their activities often qualify as political, and most of their paid advertisements will fall under the new regulatory regime of Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising (TTPA).

Google’s withdrawal from the field could further exacerbate the challenges faced by civil society or impede the formation of new political parties, which often depend on Big Tech platforms to reach their audience.

Google justifies its decision by pointing to the legal uncertainty introduced by the TTPA. In the announcement, Google’s vice president of government affairs and public policy for Europe, Anette Kroeber-Riel, highlights the overly broad definition of political advertising in the TTPA as one of the main reasons behind the move. 

Google’s decision is an imprudent reaction to a flawed regulation, even though we acknowledge that the TTPA’s definition of political advertising is indeed excessively broad.

In its announcement, Google criticizes the “lack of reliable local election data permitting consistent and accurate identification of” political ads, with the technical guidance expected to arrive only shortly before the rules come into effect. 

Civil society organizations have raised different concerns throughout the legislative process.

We warned European legislators about the dangers of over-regulation, which creates a potential threat to vibrant public discourse on critical political causes.

An overly-broad definition of political advertising poses a threat to freedom of expression and access to information, as it imposes restrictive rules on content that should not fall within the scope of political advertising. 

Equating civil society with political parties would provide a legal basis  for the rising number of Europe’s authoritarian leaders to arbitrarily restrict the work of civil society

For example, campaigns supporting victims of domestic violence should not be regulated the same way as political candidates’ election campaigns. These campaigns differ tremendously in their societal roles, potential influence, the power they aim for and their financial backing.

Civil society should not be treated as competitors of political parties.

Applying the same rules to their campaigns creates unnecessary obstacles, limiting their ability to reach their audiences, advocate for societal causes, and sustain their fundraising activities.

Furthermore, equating civil society with political parties would provide a legal basis  for the rising number of Europe’s authoritarian leaders to arbitrarily restrict the work of civil society. 

Google’s decision to stop serving political advertising in the EU will limit people’s fundamental rights in three significant ways.

First, non-partisan initiatives, including  'get out and vote' campaigns, will be prohibited on Google’s services, limiting voters’ access to essential election information. 

Second, civil society organizations' campaigns on general issues, such as abortion or domestic violence, if connected to legislative acts, will no longer be permitted on Google’s services, most importantly on YouTube, in the EU.

This restriction will seriously hamper civil society’s ability to fulfil their role in democratic public discourse. Big Tech companies have already deranked political content and news items on their platforms. Changing their algorithm is concerning in itself, given the fact that some people get their information exclusively through these platforms.

Lastly, Google’s quitting the political advertising market essentially creates an imbalance in the sector, ceding a monopoly for Meta’s platforms and leaving political parties, civil society and other entities at the company’s mercy. 

Europe alone now?

The European Union has been at the forefront of regulating Big Tech.

Landmark policies, such as the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, the AI Act, and the GDPR, significantly shaped the practices of  US-based tech giants.

It seems, however, this leadership was sustainable only with US support.

President-elect Trump's announcement of plans to deregulate tech companies, and to discard president Biden's relevant executive orders on his first day in office, signals a major shift.

The EU will face the prospect of going alone in trying to regulate the companies that deeply influence the everyday life of nearly everyone on the planet. There is a high probability that other companies will follow Google's lead and partially withdraw from the European market. 

If a company so integral to our daily lives can unilaterally cut such services, thereby undermining access to information, and the ability to form opinions and participate in public discussions, while generating enormous profits from services it keeps running in the EU, then there is an issue with the law or its enforcement. 

EU policymakers must engage in negotiations with Google to ensure that political advertising, including civil society content, can flourish on their platforms. Local initiatives, public interest causes,  and civil society organizations must have the ability to communicate and remain accessible, as they are an integral part of our democracies.