You’re Being Watched
What it is
Surveillance advertising may not be a familiar term, but it should be. It is the core profit driver for gatekeepers like Facebook (Meta) and Google, as well as ad tech intermediaries – is the practice of extensively tracking and profiling individuals and groups and then microtargeting ads at them based on their behavioral history, relationships, and identity. These dominant firms curate the content each person sees on their platforms using those dossiers – not just the ads, but newsfeeds, recommendations, trends, and so forth – to keep each user hooked, so they can be served more ads and mined for more data. (Coalition Letter) It is therefore essential to understand the reason behind why these platforms are free for us to use and more profitable than ever. Just because we do not pay a direct fee to utilize these platforms does not mean that we aren’t paying for this in other ways.
Why you should care
Social media companies generate massive profits by endlessly tracking and profiling us, determining how to keep us hooked, and then hyper-targeting us with ads. These platforms manipulate each user’s information flow - and boost false and divisive content - to maximize engagement, so they can show us more ads and learn more about our behavior. Big Tech is making billions off surveillance advertising, and our society is paying the price. Our data bodies or the various information cells that makeup how we move and exist online are under constant threat of surveillance, tracking, trading, and selling to the highest bidder. This is now an industry built on monetizing human emotions online. (Real Costs of the Business) Not only are we unaware that we are being affected and used, but we are also oblivious to the various ways in which this is taking place. It is changing our everyday behavior over a period of time and hence seems inconsequential or unnoticeable. Predictions about who people are and what they will buy offer the most promise to advertisers because they enable targeting nearly everyone, even those with little data available. (Thompson)
Concerns about Surveillance Advertising
We know that this has a widespread impact on everyday people, but it is necessary to understand the concrete ways in which this manifests. For example, Facebook (Meta) served ads promoting health conspiracy theories and unproven medical treatments - including by allowing advertisers to micro-target COVID-19 misinformation to users interested in “pseudoscience.” (Real Costs of the Business) Such actions are not only immensely selfish and irresponsible but have very real consequences in curbing the potential deaths caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. It makes society as a whole suffer for longer and benefits no one other than Big Tech companies. Additionally, amidst the backdrop of deep partisan divides and increasingly violent, racist, and hateful rhetoric on its platform, Facebook (Meta) has profited off ads selling military gear to members of extremist groups on its platform, fueling an unsafe environment.
In another instance, federal law enforcement agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) purchased personalized data collected by ad-tech companies to track down and arrest immigrant families, often by sidestepping the Fourth Amendment civil liberties protections. Further, as a result of patchwork regulations and loopholes, advertisers are able to use data collected from children’s online profiles from platforms like Facebook (Meta) and Google and exploit it. Hence, children are then served ads that promote a variety of harms ranging from sugary drinks to tobacco use. Lastly, Big Tech platforms allow advertisers to target ads based on demographic information like race, religion, and zip code. This information can then be used to exploit disparities that can result in discriminatory pricing, racially insensitive product servicing, and other unfair market conditions. As seen by the examples above, it is evident that this affects everyone, no matter the demographic. The growth of this industry has come at the cost of societal values of transparency, fairness, accountability, and safety offline.
“I use ad-blockers”
It is nearly impossible for us to avoid tracking and profiling. Ad-blockers allow us to stop seeing some ads and thus stop tracking, but only to a certain extent. Consumers can use global privacy controls on their internet browsers to send a signal communicating that they don’t want their data to be sold, but that says nothing about data collection. Further, companies can simply ignore these signals unless the law requires companies to honor them.
What can be done?
Firstly, ending invasive snooping on users and the sale of users' intimate thoughts and feelings to advertisers would remove the financial incentives that drive so much online and offline harm. This would be a huge step to preserving our privacy, civil liberties and ensuring that individuals don’t fall victim to behavioral ad targeting practices. Secondly, while Facebook and Google portray themselves as lifelines for small businesses, the truth is they’re simply charging monopoly rents for access to the digital economy. Their surveillance-driven stranglehold over the ad market leaves the little guys with no leverage or choice - which the tech giants use to exploit them. Researchers have found that buying targeted ads can cost merchants up to 500% more than what they pay for other ads, despite offering minimal benefit. Therefore, not only are individuals being exploited but small businesses and organizations are being systemically disadvantaged and discouraged. In addition, surveillance advertising has crushed the traditional news industry, especially local journalism. This obsession with market dominance and profit has driven them to employ anticompetitive practices in the ad marketplace - colluding to protect their duopoly and power. Thus, the vague and invasive world of targeted advertising has paved the way for a variety of new revenue streams for fraudsters: targeting ads to sell fake products, operating phishing schemes, and developing intricate recruitment networks to game the system - lining the pockets of snake-oil-salesmen and Big Tech platforms at everyday users’ expense. It simply benefits the Big Tech companies and this circle continually perpetuates, making it imperative for a drastic change like banning surveillance advertising from taking place in the industry. This is not a radical idea either; in fact, 4 in 5 Americans support a ban on surveillance advertising. (Real Costs of the Business)
Why has there been a lack of action?
Evidently, the harmful effects have been thoroughly established, and there is a wide consensus on addressing the problem; then why has it not been solved yet? Due to the exponential and sudden growth of the tech industry, there is a lot of gray area with respect to data privacy laws and consumer rights. Every day people are intimidated by the technicality of the industry and have hence not attempted to understand it. This lack of intersectionality and attention allowed these Big Tech companies to silently exploit their users. This caused the lack of a consensus and concentrated effort for the longest time. Therefore, now that more progress has been made, there are specific solutions that can be implemented that will lead to the eventual ban of surveillance advertising.
What can I do?
The primary step is spreading awareness. It’s not only imperative that more people know about the problem but also that they understand its impact in depth. They need to know that their behavior is being changed or rather finetuned over time, without them even realizing it. It’s essential that they see it as a personal and societal threat. Awareness can spread by encouraging people to watch documentaries such as The Social Dilemma, Coded Bias, and The Great Hack. While these suggestions seem trivial, it is the easiest way to convince people to educate themselves since it’s through a medium of entertainment. Further, it’s less intimidating for those who don’t know much about the tech world because it explains it in a simplistic way, clearly outlining the real-world impacts.
Additionally, further resources for people to educate themselves from credible sources can be made easily available - links to articles, research papers, online courses, etc., so that they can do independent research. An extension could also include the various ways people can take action, ranging from small-scale efforts such as using ad blockers in browsers and creating family media agreements to more large-scale legal ones such as holding Big Tech companies accountable. ('The Social Dilemma' - Take Action) The reason this tactic would be effective is that it would address the key reasons for which surveillance advertising hasn’t been banned yet - lack of information and concentrated efforts. Even small actions would demonstrate solidarity for the cause and cause the news organizations, hence eventually, the platforms to take notice.
Strongly broadcasting statistics on how many people support the ban of surveillance advertising would be essential as it would demonstrate that the majority believes in it (i.e., it is not a partisan issue), re-emphasizing the fact that it impacts all demographics. This will make people want to conform to the group’s behavior, thereby increasing support for the cause. Creating a publicly sourced website that contains all these resources (documentaries, research papers, online courses, potential actions) would be highly beneficial as it would create a consolidated page dedicated to the cause so that the reach is widespread. Setting up social media pages with the same domain name as the website would accelerate the reach. The social media pages could provide educational resources as well as engaging content that calls the individual out, making them aware of how surveillance advertising is affecting them right at that moment.
Conclusion
We must remember that potential short-term fixes will almost certainly not address the root of the problem. Hence, the objective needs to be re-emphasized - banning surveillance advertising. Further, the need to take immediate action must be emphasized as the lack of it could lead to the collapse of democracy. Therefore, encouraging people to gather signatures and support at a grassroots level and delivering these to local representatives is important; it lets people in positions of authority aware of their constituents' concerns, allowing them to better address them.
Lastly, providing legal and other support to allow people to organize, peacefully protest and reach out to their local representatives and push them to act on banning surveillance advertising. It must be argued that we own our data and have a right to preserve it. Technology is a largely unregulated area, and just because people may not have the technical knowledge to form laws around data privacy doesn’t mean they can’t fight for their right to it. Data privacy is a human right. All of these proposed solutions, however, rely largely on collective pressure from individuals. It cannot be a one-time news cycle. It is a long-term fight intended to create systemic change and clearly define our rights. To save society and our democracy, we must take a concrete stand and follow through until the objective has been met.
