The European Union's chief privacy and data protection regulator has urged EU policymakers to strengthen proposed transparency rules for political ads, instead of banning microtargeting for political purposes.
The Commission proposal to regulate political ads, last fall, fell far short of what this publication characterized at the time as a very "tepid" set of political ads transparency rules.
The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), Wojciech Wiewirowski, recommended in an opinion yesterday that the regulation needs to be strengthened after the Commission's proposal.
Political communication is necessary for citizens, political parties and candidates to fully participate in democratic life. Strong rules are needed to combat voter manipulation and interferences with elections. He said in his opinion that more needs to be done to tackle the risks of using targeting and amplification techniques for political purposes.
The call for a ban on political microtargeting by the EDPS is not a new idea, as it was previously called for by the EU lawmakers.
He warned in February last year that transparency measures may not be enough to prevent the harms linked to microtargeting, such as discrimination, the exploitation of vulnerable or protected people and groups, and the amplification of hate and fraud.
The case for a ban on political ads is even stronger now than it was before, according to his opinion.
The existing business models behind many online services have contributed to increased political and idealogical polarisation. The EDPS considers his recommendations about online targeted advertising to be even more valid in the political context, having in mind its potential negative impact on the integrity of democracy and its representative institutions.
Political discourse and democratic electoral processes can be influenced by targeted advertising. Targeted advertising makes it possible to target individual voters as well as group with tailored messages, specific to the particular needs, interests and values of the target.
The Commission concluded that certain practices have detrimental effects on citizens' fundamental rights and freedoms, including their freedom of opinion and of information, to make political decisions and exercise their voting rights. He believes that they present increasing risks for society as a whole, and that they present fundamental rights for individuals.
He warns that the use of personal data can allow for different groups of voters or individuals to be categorized and exploited, such as by serving an ad at a particular moment in time or a place when a person or group may be more sensitive to the messaging.
In the case of ads delivered via microtargeting platforms like Facebook, there may be hundreds of thousands of permutations of marketing, tweaking and tailored to specific individuals, is simply not realistic.
The EDPS is concerned about the use of personal data for microtargeting, and how such data may be analyzed to infer characteristics (or otherwise derive information) about individuals which is then used to target that person with messages judged to be relevant to them.
It seems unlikely that contextual advertising, which does not rely on processing individuals personal data to determine which ad to show, and where targeting is based on a general location, would invoke the same suite of concerns.
The EDPS wants to see more restrictions on the categories of data that can be used for political targeting under the proposed law.
The Commission proposal suggests some limits on the personal data that can be used for political targeting, which is focused on so called "special category" data, which refers to personal data considered the most sensitive (such as health data, political or religious affiliation, ethnic or racial origin, sexuality and so
The Commission's suggested limitations include two gaping exceptions which make the claimed limits worthless, as we pointed out in our analysis last year.
In an awkward line of assessment for the Commission, the EDPS considers that the proposal does not appear to offer any additional protection in comparison to existing Union legislation on data protection.
It is unlikely that political microtargeting that makes use of such sensitive personal data would have a valid legal basis under EU data protection law.
France has spent $170 million on Facebook and $68 million on cookie consent.
He asserts that it is questionable to what extent the citizen will actually be sufficiently and meaningfully informed when it comes to ad profiling and targeting.
The proposal of having specific detrimental effects should not be allowed at all to take place and the individual's consent should be sufficient to mitigate the risks posed by them.
The Commission trumpeted of an "ambitious" proposal last year, but this is a very firm slapdown to the whole approach.
The data protection supervisor of the bloc says the proposal won't do anything.
It was very bad.
The Commission was contacted to respond to the opinion. We will update this report if we get a comment, but at the time of writing it had not responded.
When it comes to problematic digital practices, the EU's executive is not a fan of banning very much.
A proposal to regulate the use of artificial intelligence was introduced by the Commission last year. Civil society warned that the text added many limitations, dilutions and exceptions to the suggested prohibitions and it was hard to see how they would have a meaningful effect on limiting harms.
Civil society groups warn that Europe's act falls short of protecting fundamental rights.
The Commission is not in favor of a ban on microtargeting.
In recent months, a number of Commissioners have been straight-up parroting the adtech industry talking points on the topic, in a bid to influence the European Parliament's negotiating position on the legislation. The limits on tracking ads were just given a thumbs up by the European Parliament.
Tracking industry lobbyists with links to the adtech duopoly argue that the survival of small businesses is dependent upon Internet users giving up their privacy in order that everyone can be profiled and targeted cheaply enough to spark a revolution.
The European Parliament committee in November of last year apparently favored transparency and user friendly controls, the sort of measures adtech lobbyists like to suggest to try to fend off meaningful regulation. Such as the recommended ban.
The Commission as a whole sees the need for political ads to have different rules than commercial ads in order to create a perception that political ads are being dealt with more strictly in the EU.
Their proposal looks like it will deliver more tedious and exhausting regulatory theatre than meaningful limits on serious harms. EU citizens shouldn't be impressed.
While adtech lobbying to defend privacy-hostile microtargeting continues to try to chainlink the mass tracking, profiling and behavioral targeting of Internet users to the economic survival of SMEs, a YouGov survey earlier this month offers a very different perspective.
It's not a ringing endorsement of ads from European SMEs.
It has been clear for years that she is not a fan of boosting competition by breaking up Big Tech, which could be one way to ensure SMEs have a better choice of ad tools.
She is not a fan of blocking Big Tech M&As which may further entrench dominance, preferring behavioral remedies, and/or regulation, rather than stronger intervention to restore competitive balance to tipped markets.
There was a ten year ban on the use of health data for advertising by Google, which was one of the "commitments" Vestager accepted to waive through that particular acquisition back in 2020.
The Commission only opened a formal probe of the adtech stack last summer, lagging way behind complaints and investigations across multiple jurisdictions.
The Digital Markets Act, which is fast making its way through the EU's co-legislative process, is the best way to clean up abusive practices in Big (ad)Tech. Since the parliament voted for restrictions on microtargeting to be added into that law, her approach has been lacking.
As it draws up regulatory proposals, the Commission is bound to listen to the other EU institutions. It's an interesting question to ponder how long it can keep sticking its fingers in its ears.
Europe has a set of political ads transparency rules.
Next year, Europe will put forward rules for political ads transparency.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
