Consent-or-pay

❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub

---

This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Learn more ▼

Issues may include:

• This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
• This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
• More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
• The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
• The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content

How you can help:

• Add documented examples with verifiable sources
• Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
• Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
• Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
• Flesh out the article with relevant information

This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, please visit the Moderator's noticeboard, or the Discord (join here) and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.

Consent-or-pay is a business tactic in response to the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Under this model, users of a website have to either:

1. Consent to the use of cookies and personal data for targeted advertising, or
2. Pay a recurring fee, usually a small monthly amount, to access the service without tracking.

The practice generated significant debate among regulators, policymakers, and consumer advocates. Critics describe it as a form of coercion which "coerces people to consent" and undermines meaningful consent. Despite controversy, the model is being increasingly adopted by large online platforms and news organizations. As of August 2025, 16 of the 50 largest UK news websites had implemented consent-or-pay.

Background

Main article: General Data Protection Regulation

How it works

When a user visits a website, a pop-up consent window is displayed. Traditional options would be Accept or Reject cookies. However the user is presented with the options to Accept or Pay.

• The payment is typically a low fee (around £1.99 per month).
• Many of the sites that use the model were previously free-to-access and funded primarily through advertising.
• Consumers must now “pay” either with their personal data or with money.

This effectively introduces a paywall for previously freely accessible content, even if no traditional subscription model exists.

Why it is a problem

If the theme or common term is positive for the consumer this section can be omitted.

Point 1

Point 2

---

Add your text below this box. Once this section is complete, delete this box by clicking on it and pressing backspace.

Meta investigation and fine

In 2024, Meta has been accused of employing sly workarounds for GDPR, including an earlier version of consent-or-pay. They have since changed the messaging and how its displayed; however, UK visitors to Facebook and Instagram must still choose between consenting to data collection or paying the monthly fee in order to access those platforms.

In June of 2025, the European Commission stated that Meta's continued practice of consent-or-pay may accrue daily fines.

Other uses

News organizations

Many media outlets adopted Consent-or-pay. Some High-profile european examples include:

• The Mirror
• The Independent
• Der Spiegel
• Der Standard
• Le Monde
• Le Parisien
• Corriere della Sera

Response

Criticisms from policymakers

In 2024, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published an opinion on "Valid Consent in the Context of Consent or Pay Models Implemented by Large Online Platforms." The EDPB denotes that the consent-or-pay model does not constitute as valid consent and that appropriate alternative measures to the model should provide users with an "equivalent alternative." Additionally, they say that if a company wishes to use a payment model, then the opposing equivalent alternative should not involve processing personal data. Any choice in which users feel compelled to consent does not qualify as valid consent.

Anu Talus, Chair of the EDPB, said:

“Online platforms should give users a real choice when employing ‘consent or pay’ models. The models we have today usually require individuals to either give away all their data or to pay. As a result most users consent to the processing in order to use a service, and they do not understand the full implications of their choices.”

Consumer response

Example Text