“The decision to remove these detailed targeting options was not easy and we know this change may negatively impact some businesses and organizations,” Graham Mudd, a vice president of product marketing for Meta, said. “Like many of our decisions, this was not a simple choice and required a balance of competing interests where there was advocacy in both directions.”
Meta’s changes are likely to have a more substantial footprint outside politics, such as in combating housing discrimination or exploiting body image issues to sell products.
And political campaigns will have some new hurdles to overcome. Using behavior targeting or interest targeting can be critical for finding new voters or donors, as well as for maintaining the efficiency that is a hallmark of digital advertising.
“We use it as a way to exclude conservative-leaning segments,” said Cat Stern, the director of digital persuasion at Authentic, a Democratic digital firm, explaining how interest targeting helps campaigns reach voters more efficiently. She added that the removal of behavioral targeting, such as finding people “likely to engage with political content,” would also force campaigns to “get creative” in their efforts to reach new audiences.
Understand the Facebook Papers
Card 1 of 6A tech giant in trouble. The leak of internal documents by a former Facebook employee has provided an intimate look at the operations of the secretive social media company and renewed calls for better regulations of the company’s wide reach into the lives of its users.
How it began. In September, The Wall Street Journal published The Facebook Files, a series of reports based on leaked documents. The series exposed evidence that Facebook, which on Oct. 28 assumed the corporate name of Meta, knew Instagram, one of its products was worsening body-image issues among teenagers.
The whistle-blower. During an interview with “60 Minutes” that aired Oct. 3, Frances Haugen, a Facebook product manager who left the company in May, revealed that she was responsible for the leak of those internal documents.
Ms. Haugen’s testimony in Congress. On Oct. 5, Ms. Haugen testified before a Senate subcommittee, saying that Facebook was willing to use hateful and harmful content on its site to keep users coming back. Facebook executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, called her accusations untrue.
The Facebook Papers. Ms. Haugen also filed a complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission and provided the documents to Congress in redacted form. A congressional staff member then supplied the documents, known as the Facebook Papers, to several news organizations, including The New York Times.
New revelations. Documents from the Facebook Papers show the degree to which Facebook knew of extremist groups on its site trying to polarize American voters before the election. They also reveal that internal researchers had repeatedly determined how Facebook’s key features amplified toxic content on the platform.
In a statement on Wednesday calling on Meta to reverse its changes, the four campaign arms of the Democratic Party — the national committee, and committees that oversee races for governor, House and Senate — argued that the new limitations did not address the larger crisis plaguing the platform: disinformation.
“Meta has once again shirked its responsibility to protect voters on its platforms by implementing backwards political ad policies that will limit our ability to communicate with voters about the democratic process, and that once again do nothing to address the platform’s most serious issue — an algorithm that incentivizes misinformation and hate,” the statement said.