Individual HTML example · Obstruction

Advertising opt-out split across unrelated menus

A fictional service places audience ads, partner sharing and measurement controls under three differently named menus with no summary of the final state.

Privacy mazePrivacy settingsAccount Management

This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.

Privacy settingsAccount Management

Advertising opt-out split across unrelated menus

A fictional service places audience ads, partner sharing and measurement controls under three differently named menus with no summary of the final state.

Potentially problematicManage experience controls
Neutral alternativeOptional data uses

Why the first version can mislead: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this privacy settings example, the obstacle is: “Related advertising choices are scattered across “Experience”, “Partners” and “Insights”.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “Turn off optional uses” reaches the represented state. A person may fail to restrict optional uses because the controls are fragmented and inconsistently described.

What a fairer design does: Provide a coherent overview, consistent purpose names and a clear summary of what each choice changes.

Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
  • Unconfirmed state: Open another menuIn “Advertising opt-out split across unrelated menus”, this element shows how privacy maze can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
  • Persisted account state, expanded: The saved state behind “Turn off optional uses” remains consistent after refresh and across supported channels.In “Advertising opt-out split across unrelated menus”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
  • How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “Open another menu” from the completed privacy settings outcome?
  • Test the control across refresh, device and account states; is “A meaningful privacy-restrictive outcome exists in principle” still observable after persistence is considered?
  • Measure the same task through the clearest available route: does the effort difference persist once “Granular controls with a clear overview and global options” is accounted for?
Side-by-side privacy settings interface showing “Manage experience controls” and the clearer alternative “Optional data uses”.Provenance: Original hypothetical privacy settings example created for this library; no real business, product or interface is depicted.

Complete pattern context

How this example relates to Privacy maze

Privacy controls are fragmented, inconsistently labelled or layered so that limiting collection or use is unnecessarily difficult. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.

The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, harms, fair design principles, evidence questions and the relevant EU legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.

Open the complete pattern guideMore obstruction examples

Continue comparing

Privacy maze

Privacy choice silently re-enables elsewhere

Connected-device accountAccount Management

A fictional account lets users disable activity sharing on the web, but opening the mobile app silently restores the setting under a different label.

Open this example

Account deletion obstruction

Deactivation presented as deletion

Social account settingsAccount Management

A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.

Open this example

Account deletion obstruction

Deletion buried behind an unsupported ticket

Shopping accountAccount Management

A fictional retailer places account deletion behind six help pages and requires a support ticket containing an order number even for users who never ordered.

Open this example
Sources and provenance for this example

Evidence base

Sources

  1. An Ontology of Dark Patterns KnowledgeGray et al.; ACM CHI 2024 · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · DOI 10.1145/3613904.3642436; arXiv:2309.09640
  2. Behavioural study on unfair commercial practices in the digital environmentEuropean Commission, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · DOI 10.2838/859030; ISBN 978-92-76-52316-1
  3. Unfair Commercial Practices DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2005/29/EC; CELEX 02005L0029-20220528