Consent-or-pay

⚠️ Article status notice: This article has been marked as incomplete

This article needs additional work for its sourcing and verifiability to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues.

This notice will be removed once sufficient documentation has been added to establish the systemic nature of these issues. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, please visit the Moderator's noticeboard, or the discord and post to the #appeals channel.

Learn more ▼

This Article Requires Additional Verification

---

This article has been flagged due to verification concerns. While the topic might have merit, the claims presented lack citations that live up to our standards, or rely on sources that are questionable or unverifiable by our standards. Articles must meet the Moderator Guidelines and Mission statement; factual accuracy and systemic relevance are required for inclusion here!

Why This Article Is In Question

---

Articles in this wiki are required to:

• Provide verifiable & credible evidence to substantiate claims.
• Avoid relying on anecdotal, unsourced, or suspicious citations that lack legitimacy.
• Make sure that all claims are backed by reliable documentation or reporting from reputable sources.

Examples of issues that trigger this notice:

• A topic that heavily relies on forum posts, personal blogs, or other unverifiable sources.
• Unsupported claims with no evidence or citations to back them up.
• Citations to disreputable sources, like non-expert blogs or sites known for spreading misinformation.

How You Can Improve This Article

---

To address verification concerns:

• Replace or supplement weak citations with credible, verifiable sources.
• Make sure that claims are backed by reputable reporting or independent documentation.
• Provide additional evidence to demonstrate systemic relevance and factual accuracy. For example:
  • Avoid: Claims based entirely on personal anecdotes or hearsay without supporting documentation.
  • Include: Corporate policies, internal communications, receipts, repair logs, verifiable video evidence, or credible investigative reports.

If you believe this notice has been placed in error, or once the article has been updated to address these concerns, please visit the #appeals channel on our Discord server: Join here.

Consent-or-pay, also known as consent-or-okay, is a business model implemented in response to the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Under this model, users of a website are presented with a choice to either:

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

The practice has been the subject of discussion among regulators, policymakers, and consumer advocates, with many viewing the practice as undermining the principle of meaningful consent within the General Data Protection Regulation. Consent-or-pay has been adopted by a number of large online platforms and news organizations. As of August 2025, 16 of the 50 largest UK news websites had implemented a consent-or-pay model.

Background

Main article: General Data Protection Regulation

The General Data Protection Regulation was enacted in 2018 with the objective of protecting online users from extensive data collection by companies. The regulation requires companies to obtain user consent for data collection, which is typically facilitated through an opt-in banner or pop-up on a website^{[citation needed]}.

Some companies reported a negative impact on revenue following the regulation's implementation^{[citation needed]}, as the scale of data collection for targeted advertising was reduced. The consent-or-pay model emerged as one approach to address this change.

How it works

When a user visits a website, a pop-up consent window is displayed. While traditional options were to Accept or Reject cookies, the consent-or-pay model presents users with the options to Accept or Pay.

• The payment is typically a monthly fee (e.g. £1.99 per month)^{[citation needed]}.
• Many sites employing this model were previously free-to-access and funded primarily through advertising.
• Users must now either pay with their personal data or with a monetary fee.

This effectively introduces a paywall for content that is considered freely available, even in the absence of a traditional subscription model.

Why it is a problem

Invalid consent

This binary choice model raises questions about the validity of consent as users are required to choose between two options, both of which involve a form of payment for content that is considered free.

Lack of informed consent

Companies typically state that cookies and data collection are for "personalized ads" and "improving services." The extent to which user data is stored, shared with third-parties, sold to data brokers, or potentially exposed in data breaches is often not detailed. This may lead to users underestimating the long-term implications of sharing their personal data.

False equivalence

The consent-or-pay model equates the value of a user's data to a specific monetary amount. The methodology for calculating this equivalent monthly fee has been questioned^{[citation needed - by who?]}, as it is difficult to ascertain the precise advertising revenue generated from an individual user. The fee is often based on an average revenue per user (ARPU) metric, which applies a generalized value to all users regardless of their individual engagement with advertisements^{[citation needed]}.

Illusion of a fair exchange

The model can create a perception that a fair exchange is taking place. By offering a seemingly low monthly fee as an alternative to data collection, users may believe they are compensating the company fairly for lost advertising revenue. This can influence the decision-making process regarding data privacy.

Meta investigation and fine

Following an investigation by the European Commission, Meta was fined on 23 April 2025 for non-compliance with the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The investigation concluded that Meta's consent-or-pay model did not meet the DMA's requirements for reducing personalized data for targeted ads and did not allow for freely given consent. Meta was fined €228 million in April, and by July, the European Commission warned that the company could face additional daily fines if it continued to employ this model.

Uses

News organizations

Several media outlets in Europe have adopted consent-or-pay models, including:

• The Mirror
• The Independent
• Der Spiegel
• Der Standard
• Le Monde
• Le Parisien
• Corriere della Sera
• MeridioNews
• 
  Screenshot of MeridioNews' consent-or-pay policy appearing after rejecting cookies on one of their articles
• 
  (machine-translated) screenshot of MeridioNews' consent-or-pay policy

Critical response

Regulatory agencies

In 2024, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published a non-binding opinion on "Valid Consent in the Context of Consent or Pay Models Implemented by Large Online Platforms." The opinion stated that the consent-or-pay model does not constitute valid consent and that appropriate alternative measures should provide users with an "equivalent alternative." Furthermore, it noted that if a payment model is offered, the alternative should not involve processing personal data. Choices 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 advocacy groups

"noyb" is a data protection advocacy organization based in Austria that focuses primarily on compliance and violations of the General Data Protection Regulation. In November 2023, the group filed a complaint with the Austrian Data Protection Authority against Meta, arguing that the company lacked "any valid legal basis for [pay-or-okay]. [...] Meta is now trying to extort supposed consent from its users with a 'yes or pay' choice". The complaint cited the high costs of rejecting personalized ads, which was €12.99 per month for Facebook and €8 per month for Instagram, approximating a combined annual cost of €251.88. noyb expressed concern that Meta's approach could set a precedent for other platforms, potentially leading to €35,000 per family when combined with other platforms and websites.

Effectiveness

The impact of the consent-or-pay model varies.

• Advertising Week reported in September 2023 that 30% of users accepted cookies post-GDPR.

• In 2023, The Drum reported that approximately 40% of users employed a VPN to bypass regional consent-or-pay restrictions.

• In 2025, the Press Gazette stated, "When users are equally offered the chance to 'accept all' or 'reject all' cookies, consent rates are typically somewhere around 70-80%, according to both Skovgaards and Contentpass founder Dirk Freytag".

Alternative practices

Some organizations have developed alternative advertising models. The Guardian implemented a "contextual advertising" model that serves ads based on the content of the page a user is viewing (e.g., food ingredients on a recipe page). The company described it as "a perfect advertising product for a privacy conscious brand." In 2023, they reported a 35% increase in ad clicks with this model.

See also

Europe-based news sites enact consent-or-pay for data tracking

Years of inactivity in “Pay or OK” cases: noyb sues German DPAs

noyb's Pay or Okay report: how companies make you pay for privacy