TikTok

Report September 2026

Submitted
TikTok’s mission is to inspire creativity and bring joy. With more than 200 million people across Europe coming to TikTok every month, including 189 million in the EU, it’s natural for people to hold different opinions. That’s why we focus on a shared set of facts when it comes to issues that affect people’s safety. A safe, authentic, and trustworthy experience is essential to achieving our goals. Transparency plays a key role in building that trust, allowing online communities and society to assess how TikTok meets its regulatory obligations. As a signatory to the Code of Conduct on Disinformation (the Code), TikTok is committed to sharing clear insights into the actions we take.

TikTok takes disinformation extremely seriously. We are committed to preventing its spread, promoting authoritative information, and supporting media literacy initiatives that strengthen community resilience.

Our 2026 H1 report under the Code can be found below. 

Download PDF

Commitment 31
Relevant Signatories commit to integrate, showcase, or otherwise consistently use fact-checkers' work in their platforms' services, processes, and contents; with full coverage of all Member States and languages.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 31.1 and 31.2 Measure 31.3 Measure 31.4
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
No
If yes, list these implementation measures here
N/A
Do you plan to put further implementation measures in place in the next 6 months to substantially improve the maturity of the implementation of this commitment?
N/A
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
N/A
Measure 31.1 and 31.2
31.1: Relevant Signatories that showcase User Generated Content (UGC) will integrate, showcase, or otherwise consistently use independent fact-checkers’ work in their platforms’ services, processes, and contents across all Member States and across formats relevant to the service. Relevant Signatories will collaborate with fact-checkers to that end, starting by conducting and documenting research and testing. 31.2: Relevant Signatories that integrate fact-checks in their products or processes will ensure they employ swift and efficient mechanisms such as labelling, information panels or policy enforcement to help increase the impact of fact-checks on audiences.
QRE 31.1.1 (for Measures 31.1 and 31.2)
Relevant Signatories will report on their specific activities and initiatives related to Measures 31.1 and 31.2, including the full results and methodology applied in testing solutions to that end.
We place considerable emphasis on proactive detection and automated moderation technology to action violative content. For example, "multi-modal LLMs" can perform complex, highly specific tasks related to visual content. We can use this technology to make misinformation moderation easier by extracting specific misinformation "claims" from videos for moderators to assess directly or route to our fact-checking partners.
Our Integrity and Authenticity moderators receive direct access to our fact-checking partners who help assess the accuracy of content. We also use fact-checking feedback to provide additional context to users about certain content. As mentioned, when our fact checking partners conclude that the fact-check is inconclusive or content is not able to be confirmed, we inform viewers via a banner when we identify a video with unverified content in an effort to raise users' awareness about the credibility of the content and to reduce sharing. The video may also become ineligible for recommendation into anyone's For You feed to limit the spread of potentially misleading information.
SLI 31.1.1
Member State level reporting on use of fact-checks by service and the swift and efficient mechanisms in place to increase their impact, which may include (as depends on the service): number of fact-check articles published; reach of fact-check articles; number of content pieces reviewed by fact-checkers.
The number of fact checked videos is based on the number of videos that have been reviewed by one of our fact-checking partners in the relevant territory.
Number of fact checked videos (tasks)
Austria 40
Belgium 78
Bulgaria 140
Croatia 4
Cyprus 14
Czech Republic 101
Denmark 51
Estonia 100
Finland 34
France 1659
Germany 318
Greece 51
Hungary 12
Ireland 36
Italy 662
Latvia 5
Lithuania 3
Luxembourg 1
Malta 4
Netherlands 343
Poland 1926
Portugal 263
Romania 73
Slovakia 108
Slovenia 6
Spain 726
Sweden 30
Iceland 1
Norway 44
SLI 31.1.2
An estimation, through meaningful metrics, of the impact of actions taken such as, for instance, the number of pieces of content labelled on the basis of fact-check articles, or the impact of said measures on user interactions with information fact-checked as false or misleading.
Methodology of data measurement:
The number of videos removed as a result of a fact-checking assessment and the number of videos removed because of policy guidelines and known misinformation trends.
These metrics correspond to the numbers of removals under the misinformation policy since all of its enforcement are based on the policy guidelines and known misinformation trends.
Number of videos removed as a result of a fact checking assessment Number of videos removed under Misinformation policy
Austria 13 11308
Belgium 22 15105
Bulgaria 11 42197
Croatia 14 9243
Cyprus 3 3222
Czech Republic 6 10470
Denmark 3 15725
Estonia 6 1963
Finland 6 5307
France 251 100530
Germany 122 113943
Greece 2 8404
Hungary 2 16159
Ireland 7 9383
Italy 142 41780
Latvia 0 3648
Lithuania 1 3146
Luxembourg 0 897
Malta 0 501
Netherlands 54 80988
Poland 392 63967
Portugal 21 11667
Romania 10 47144
Slovakia 18 4076
Slovenia 1 1273
Spain 97 56000
Sweden 0 13090
Iceland 1 345
Liechtenstein 0 5
Norway 4 17075
SLI 31.1.3
Signatories recognise the importance of providing context to SLIs 31.1.1 and 31.1.2 in ways that empower researchers, fact-checkers, the Commission, ERGA, and the public to understand and assess the impact of the actions taken to comply with Commitment 31. To that end, relevant Signatories commit to include baseline quantitative information that will help contextualise these SLIs. Relevant Signatories will present and discuss within the Permanent Task-force the type of baseline quantitative information they consider using for contextualisation ahead of their baseline reports.
Methodology of data measurement:
The metric we have provided demonstrates the % of videos which have been removed as a result of the fact-checking assessment, in comparison to the total number of videos removed because of violation of our harmful misinformation policy.
Videos removed as a result of a fact checking assessment as a percentage of total number of videos removed due to violation of harmful misinformation policy
Austria 0.11%
Belgium 0.15%
Bulgaria 0.03%
Croatia 0.15%
Cyprus 0.09%
Czech Republic 0.06%
Denmark 0.02%
Estonia 0.31%
Finland 0.11%
France 0.25%
Germany 0.11%
Greece 0.02%
Hungary 0.01%
Ireland 0.07%
Italy 0.34%
Latvia 0%
Lithuania 0.03%
Luxembourg 0%
Malta 0%
Netherlands 0.07%
Poland 0.61%
Portugal 0.18%
Romania 0.02%
Slovakia 0.44%
Slovenia 0.08%
Spain 0.17%
Sweden 0%
Iceland 0.29%
Liechtenstein 0%
Norway 0.02%