
Report September 2025
Your organisation description
Empowering Researchers
Commitment 26
Relevant Signatories commit to provide access, wherever safe and practicable, to continuous, real-time or near real-time, searchable stable access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated, or manifestly-made public data for research purposes on Disinformation through automated means such as APIs or other open and accessible technical solutions allowing the analysis of said data.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 26.1 Measure 26.3
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 26.1
Relevant Signatories will provide public access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated or manifestly-made public data pertinent to undertaking research on Disinformation on their services, such as engagement and impressions (views) of content hosted by their services, with reasonable safeguards to address risks of abuse (e.g. API policies prohibiting malicious or commercial uses).
QRE 26.1.1
Relevant Signatories will describe the tools and processes in place to provide public access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated and manifestly-made public data pertinent to undertaking research on Disinformation, as well as the safeguards in place to address risks of abuse.
QRE 26.1.2
Relevant Signatories will publish information related to data points available via Measure 25.1, as well as details regarding the technical protocols to be used to access these data points, in the relevant help centre. This information should also be reachable from the Transparency Centre. At minimum, this information will include definitions of the data points available, technical and methodological information about how they were created, and information about the representativeness of the data.
SLI 26.1.1
Relevant Signatories will provide quantitative information on the uptake of the tools and processes described in Measure 26.1, such as number of users.
Nr of data requests from qualified researchers: 2
Measure 26.3
Relevant Signatories will implement procedures for reporting the malfunctioning of access systems and for restoring access and repairing faulty functionalities in a reasonable time.
QRE 26.3.1
Relevant Signatories will describe the reporting procedures in place to comply with Measure 26.3 and provide information about their malfunction response procedure, as well as about malfunctions that would have prevented the use of the systems described above during the reporting period and how long it took to remediate them.
Commitment 28
COOPERATION WITH RESEARCHERS Relevant Signatories commit to support good faith research into Disinformation that involves their services.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 28.2 Measure 28.3
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 28.2
Relevant Signatories will be transparent on the data types they currently make available to researchers across Europe.
QRE 28.2.1
Relevant Signatories will describe what data types European researchers can currently access via their APIs or via dedicated teams, tools, help centres, programs, or events.
Measure 28.3
Relevant Signatories will not prohibit or discourage genuinely and demonstratively public interest good faith research into Disinformation on their platforms, and will not take adversarial action against researcher users or accounts that undertake or participate in good-faith research into Disinformation.
QRE 28.3.1
Relevant Signatories will collaborate with EDMO to run an annual consultation of European researchers to assess whether they have experienced adversarial actions or are otherwise prohibited or discouraged to run such research.
Transparency Centre
Commitment 34
To ensure transparency and accountability around the implementation of this Code, Relevant Signatories commit to set up and maintain a publicly available common Transparency Centre website.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 34.1 Measure 34.2 Measure 34.3 Measure 34.4 Measure 34.5
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Commitment 35
Signatories commit to ensure that the Transparency Centre contains all the relevant information related to the implementation of the Code's Commitments and Measures and that this information is presented in an easy-to-understand manner, per service, and is easily searchable.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 35.1 Measure 35.2 Measure 35.3 Measure 35.4
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Permanent Task-Force
Commitment 37
Signatories commit to participate in the permanent Task-force. The Task-force includes the Signatories of the Code and representatives from EDMO and ERGA. It is chaired by the European Commission, and includes representatives of the European External Action Service (EEAS). The Task-force can also invite relevant experts as observers to support its work. Decisions of the Task-force are made by consensus.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 37.1 Measure 37.2 Measure 37.4 Measure 37.5 Measure 37.6
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 37.6
Signatories agree to notify the rest of the Task-force when a Commitment or Measure would benefit from changes over time as their practices and approaches evolve, in view of technological, societal, market, and legislative developments. Having discussed the changes required, the Relevant Signatories will update their subscription document accordingly and report on the changes in their next report.
QRE 37.6.1
Signatories will describe how they engage in the work of the Task-force in the reporting period, including the sub-groups they engaged with.
Monitoring of the Code
Commitment 38
The Signatories commit to dedicate adequate financial and human resources and put in place appropriate internal processes to ensure the implementation of their commitments under the Code.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 38.1
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 38.1
Relevant Signatories will outline the teams and internal processes they have in place, per service, to comply with the Code in order to achieve full coverage across the Member States and the languages of the EU.
QRE 38.1.1
Relevant Signatories will outline the teams and internal processes they have in place, per service, to comply with the Code in order to achieve full coverage across the Member States and the languages of the EU.
Commitment 40
Signatories commit to provide regular reporting on Service Level Indicators (SLIs) and Qualitative Reporting Elements (QREs). The reports and data provided should allow for a thorough assessment of the extent of the implementation of the Code’s Commitments and Measures by each Signatory, service and at Member State level.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 40.1 Measure 40.3 Measure 40.4 Measure 40.5 Measure 40.6
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Commitment 42
Relevant Signatories commit to provide, in special situations like elections or crisis, upon request of the European Commission, proportionate and appropriate information and data, including ad-hoc specific reports and specific chapters within the regular monitoring, in accordance with the rapid response system established by the Task-force.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Commitment 43
Relevant Signatories commit to provide, in special situations like elections or crisis, upon request of the European Commission, proportionate and appropriate information and data, including ad-hoc specific reports and specific chapters within the regular monitoring, in accordance with the rapid response system established by the Taskforce.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
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?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Crisis and Elections Response
Elections 2025
[Note: Signatories are requested to provide information relevant to their particular response to the threats and challenges they observed on their service(s). They ensure that the information below provides an accurate and complete report of their relevant actions. As operational responses to crisis/election situations can vary from service to service, an absence of information should not be considered a priori a shortfall in the way a particular service has responded. Impact metrics are accurate to the best of signatories’ abilities to measure them].
Threats observed or anticipated
Mitigations in place
Policies and Terms and Conditions
Outline any changes to your policies
Policy - 50.1.1
Changes (such as newly introduced policies, edits, adaptation in scope or implementation) - 50.1.2
Policy - 50.1.4
Changes (such as newly introduced policies, edits, adaptation in scope or implementation) - 50.1.5
Rationale - 50.1.6
Policy - 50.1.7
Changes (such as newly introduced policies, edits, adaptation in scope or implementation) - 50.1.8
Rationale - 50.1.9
Integrity of Services
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 50.4.2
Indication of impact - 50.4.3
Empowering Users
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 50.5.2
Indication of impact - 50.5.3
Empowering the Research Community
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 50.6.2
Indication of impact - 50.6.3
Crisis 2025
[Note: Signatories are requested to provide information relevant to their particular response to the threats and challenges they observed on their service(s). They ensure that the information below provides an accurate and complete report of their relevant actions. As operational responses to crisis/election situations can vary from service to service, an absence of information should not be considered a priori a shortfall in the way a particular service has responded. Impact metrics are accurate to the best of signatories’ abilities to measure them].
Threats observed or anticipated
Bing Search has observed instances of information manipulation with possible actor intent to manipulate search algorithms and lead users to data voids and low-authority content related to the Russia<>Ukraine conflict. Themes included narratives involving Ukrainian immigrants in different countries, specific countries’ support to Ukraine (often in the context of local elections), allegations surrounding Ukrainian politicians, military operations such as third parties' potential involvement in the war, etc.
Israel – Hamas conflict
Bing Search has observed instances of data void manipulation to show low-authority content to unsuspecting users related to the Israel-Hamas conflict. This type of search algorithm manipulation could potentially be used as a tactic to spread disinformation. Other themes observed have included foreign influence operations speculating on the evolution of conflict and military operations in the area, often referring to manipulated videos and images circulating online and narratives on the broader Middle East conflicts.
Mitigations in place
Microsoft has been actively involved in identifying and helping counter Russia’s cyber and influence operations aimed against Ukraine. In addition to supporting nonprofits, journalists, and academics within Ukraine, Microsoft’s Threat Analysis Center (MTAC) team closely tracks cyber-enabled influence operations. MTAC’s work includes analysing the ways these methods are leveraged to target audiences in Central and Eastern Europe.
Israel – Hamas conflict
As part of its regular practices, Bing search employs (1) Defensive search interventions (2) regular direction of users to high authority, high quality sources as part of search algorithms; (3) remove auto suggest and related search terms considered likely to lead users to low authority content as part of moderation; (4) authority demotion of identified nation state affiliated information manipulation actor domains and (5) partnerships with independent organizations to maintain threat intelligence and inform potential algorithmic interventions. These measures are also integrated into Bing generative AI features, along with the additional safeguards discussed throughout this report.
Policies and Terms and Conditions
Outline any changes to your policies
Changes (such as newly introduced policies, edits, adaptation in scope or implementation) - 51.1.2
Bing has not implemented additional policies specific to this crisis since its last report.
Israel – Hamas conflict
Bing Search has not introduced specific policies related to this crisis, as it considers existing measures discussed throughout this report to sufficiently mitigate risks related to this crisis.
Rationale - 51.1.3
Prior to this reporting period, Bing had already established measures to address this crisis. Although Bing continues to refine its approach to addressing this crisis and continues to evolve mitigation measures, it has not introduced specific policy changes this reporting period.
Integrity of Services
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 51.4.2
Bing Search has implemented the following measures:
Israel – Hamas conflict
Bing Search has not introduced specific practices or policies related to this crisis, as it considers existing measures discussed throughout this report to sufficiently mitigate risks. However, Bing continues to monitor this crisis and may evolve its approach as needed.
Indication of impact - 51.4.3
More than 763,081 queries searched by users in the globally related to the Russia/Ukraine conflict have been treated with defensive search interventions, resulting in over 6,192,957 impressions. For member state level reporting, see SLI 22.7.1.
Israel – Hamas conflict
N/A
Empowering Users
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 51.5.2
Articles from news and fact checking organizations, may also appear as part of specialized Bing Answers. In addition, news and fact-check articles can appear in Bing News carousels, which are often presented at the top of search results pages, depending on the nature of user query. Microsoft maintains agreements with news publishers to surface high authority content, including articles from well-regarded fact checking organizations and journalist-driven fact-checks, high in relevant search results.
Israel – Hamas conflict
Bing Search has not introduced specific practices or policies related to this crisis, as it considers existing measures discussed throughout this report to sufficiently mitigate risks. However, Bing continues to monitor this crisis and may evolve its approach as needed.
- Bing partners with independent third-party organizations, such as trusted fact checkers, news publishers, and research organizations, that provide fact checks, trustworthiness indicators, and early indicators of information operations, such as narratives or hashtags, to inform early detection and defensive search strategies. These organizations provide information for EEA member states, including in German, Polish, Romanian, and Portuguese languages, countries that had elections in the period. Bing also utilizes the ClaimReview open protocol to ingest fact checks into search results.
- Bing partners with Microsoft’s internal threat detection and research teams, including Microsoft Threat Analysis Center (MTAC), to collect and analyse data on actors of disinformation, misinformation and information manipulation across platforms. These teams collaborate with external organisations and companies to support Microsoft product and service teams effectively respond to issues and threats. Through MTAC and Microsoft’s Elections and Societal Resilience team, Microsoft also offers mediums for election authorities, including in the EEA Member States, to have lines of communication with Microsoft to identify possible foreign information operations targeting elections.
Indication of impact - 51.5.3
See QRE 22.7.1 for further information.
Israel – Hamas conflict
N/A
Empowering the Research Community
Outline approaches pertinent to this chapter, highlighting similarities/commonalities and differences with regular enforcement.
Description of intervention - 51.6.5
See QRE 26.1.1 for general research support. Bing Search has not made datasets available pertaining specifically to this crisis.
Israel – Hamas conflict
See QRE 26.1.1 for general research support. Bing Search has not made datasets available pertaining specifically to this crisis.
Indication of impact - 51.6.6
N/A
Israel – Hamas conflict
N/A