Content moderation for Spanish marketplaces: what the Digital Services Act requires
Corpshore Spain editorial team · · 7 min read
In summary: the Digital Services Act requires platforms to offer mechanisms for notifying illegal content, to give a statement of reasons for every removal, and to maintain a free internal complaint system. Marketplaces must also verify their sellers' identity. In Spain, the CNMC is the Digital Services Coordinator.
For a Spanish marketplace, content moderation stopped being a reputational question and became a regulated obligation with a designated supervisor. That change affects what gets removed far less than how it is documented.
This article summarises the obligations that weigh most on the design of a moderation operation, and who supervises compliance in Spain.
Who supervises the DSA in Spain?
The National Commission for Markets and Competition was designated Spain's Digital Services Coordinator by the Ministry for Digital Transformation and the Civil Service.
The CNMC supervises intermediary service providers established in Spain, with powers of supervision, investigation and sanction, including the ability to request access to data and to the algorithmic systems used for moderation and recommendation.
Very large platforms fall under direct European Commission supervision, so for most Spanish marketplaces the counterpart is the CNMC.
What must you offer for reporting illegal content?
An accessible mechanism allowing anyone to notify content they consider illegal. It is not a generic inbox: it has to be an identifiable, usable channel.
The operational consequence is about capacity and deadlines. A notification mechanism that works generates inbound volume, and that volume needs a team processing it against a defined response time, because diligence in removal is exactly what is supervised.
Do you have to explain why content was removed?
Yes, and it is the obligation that adds most work in practice. When content is removed, the affected person must be informed with reasons justifying the decision.
That turns every removal into a documented act. A moderator removing a listing can no longer simply flag it: they have to record the reason in a form that supports a statement of reasons and, if it comes to it, a later review.
You must also offer a free internal complaint system that is prompt and transparent, so the decision can be appealed. That means a second work queue, with its own criteria and with people other than those who made the original decision.
What specific obligations do marketplaces carry?
Marketplaces, apps and rental platforms must verify their sellers' identity, ensure compliance with applicable European rules, and prevent dangerous products being sold.
Seller verification is a back office process with its own volume, distinct from content moderation, and it is frequently underestimated when sizing the operation. It is not reviewing a listing: it is checking an identity and retaining the evidence.
For an outsourced operation, it is worth separating the two queues from the design stage, because they demand different profiles and different criteria.
How do you design a moderation operation that survives an inspection?
With written guidelines per content type, updated when an edge case appears, so two different moderators reach the same decision on the same case.
With full traceability: who decided, when, on what criterion, and what reasons were communicated. Without that record, demonstrating diligence to the supervisor is difficult.
And with wellbeing protocols for staff reviewing sensitive content, which besides being right reduces turnover in a role where turnover directly degrades consistency of judgement.
This article is general information, not legal advice. We work alongside your legal advisors, not in their place.