If it isn’t Musk, it is Zuckerberg and vice versa. The world of tech has been entirely usurped by them. The two rivals are constantly in the news for all the wrong reasons. This time around, Zuckerberg is under scrutiny by the European Union.
The European Data Protection Board (EPDB) has approved the expansion of a ban that was initially put into place by Norway, a non-EU member, on ‘behavioural advertising’ on Facebook and Instagram. This extension will involve all 30 countries within the European Union and the European Economic Area (EEA). The ban restricts Meta from practising targeted advertising. This resolute call by the EU will challenge Meta Platforms as it has been actively going against efforts to limit this advertising practice.
What is behavioural advertising?
A phenomenon that has existed for as long as one can remember is the one where technology was introduced to advertising. A phenomenon that has often been subjected to criticism by a majority of people. Over the years, publishers and advertisers have used user data to segregate their audiences based on factors like demographics and location. Even though this approach is regarded unethical by most parties, it has been one of the most effective channels via which online advertising can be made relevant to the groups that are targeted. With the recent turn of events, technology has allowed brands to offer tailored and personalised promotions to their audiences. This is a practice that can boost advertising revenue and give rise to privacy concerns, simultaneously.
Behavioural advertising, also known as online behavioural advertising or OBA, enables advertisers and publishers to present users with highly pertinent advertisements. The trick that keeps this system in the loop is the fact that it banks on personalised content that is designed based on the users’ online browsing patterns. The main objective is to deliver targeted ads to specific market segments that have shown an active interest in the products or services that are being advertised. For example, Facebook monitors a user’s online activities and observes their visits to multiple fitness-related websites. Based on this behavioural data, the network assumes that the user has an interest in fitness and proceeds to display ads for fitness and wellness. However, this can come to a point where it will become a source of annoyance to the user because these advertisements will constantly be in their face, whether they like it or not.
Meta as an offender
The primary goal of the ban is to drag Meta away from the practice of targeted advertising based on user data. However, this poses a major setback for Meta Platforms. Meta recently made an announcement that showcased the rundown of their plan to offer a subscription model for Facebook and Instagram users in the EU and EEA to comply with regulatory requirements, providing the user with the option of using these social networks sans advertisements. Meta has expressed its intention to seek consent to use personal data for targeted advertising, but the EPDB stresses the need for compliance with regulatory requirements and consumer privacy. Because after all, merely stating it verbally does not guarantee that Meta would stay true to its promise.
This decision made by EPDB places the responsibility on Ireland’s data regulator, which is in charge of Meta’s European operations, to implement the final measures. Once the ban is officially in place, Meta will have no choice but to bring its data processing practises into compliance to avoid unlawful processing.
From Meta’s point of view, this is a gargantuan loss. As of the end of 2022, Facebook had approximately 300 million daily users in Europe. A number that accounts for a large portion of its global user base, which consists of about two billion users. Furthermore, European users contribute to roughly 1/5th of Meta’s advertising revenue, making Europe an important market for the company. It could lead to reduced ad spending if advertisers respond by decreasing their investments. Europeans can opt for a subscription model to experience an ad-free version of these platforms, which is priced at 9.99 euros per month on the web or 12.99 euros on mobile phones.
This is not the first time that Meta has been caught red-handed playing around with user data during the year 2023. In May, Meta had to face a cumbersome fine of 1 billion euros and was directed to suspend the transfer of user data from the EU to the US. This record-breaking fine was imposed due to a breach of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and was put into effect by the Data Protection Commission (DPC) in Ireland.
The suspension of Facebook’s data transfers is not an immediate action and was supposed to be implemented over a period that spanned five months, giving Meta time to agree to all the terms and conditions. If they had stuck to the given time frame, they would not have been called to a jury’s verdict yet again. According to The Guardian, the initial penalty was a result of legal actions that were initiated by Max Schrems, an Austrian privacy advocate, who raised concerns following the Edward Snowden revelations. These concerns focused on the lack of sufficient protection for European users’ data from US intelligence agencies when it is transmitted across the Atlantic. Back then, Meta was provided a deadline to cease the ‘unlawful processing, including storage, in the US’ of personal data belonging to EU users that has already been transferred across the Atlantic.
Time and again, Meta is accused of misdeeds that often deal with user information. Even though they are constantly on the watchlist of most authorities, Meta does not seem to take adequate measures. It is almost like Meta has placed the world on a conveyor belt, one that is controlled by themselves. They appear to have their users stuck in a vicious loop that does not have an exit.
(Sandunlekha Ekanayake)