An EU court rules that Meta may not use sexuality for targeted advertising

A court has ruled that Meta, the owners of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads, cannot target users in the EU with advertising based on their sexual orientation.

The lawsuit was filed by gay Austrian lawyer and privacy activist Max Schrems, who claimed he had been a target of advertising for nearly a decade and argued that Meta had violated EU data protection rules.

He claimed that advertisers on meta-platforms can identify users’ sexuality based on their online behavior, such as app logins or website visits, even if they do not disclose it in their profiles. The company denied showing Schrems personalized ads based on his off-Facebook data.

Wired reported that Meta excludes any sensitive data it detects from advertisers.

The case was brought to the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) after a Lower Austrian court ruled that Meta had the right to target Schrems because of his sexuality because he had spoken about it at a public event.

The ECJ overturned this ruling and ruled that a person’s sexuality could not be used for targeted advertising even under these circumstances.

“The fact that Mr. Maximilian Schrems commented on his sexual orientation during a public panel discussion does not entitle the operator of an online platform of a social network to process any further data obtained on his sexual orientation.” outside of this platform “to aggregate and analyze this data in order to offer him personalized advertising,” the court ruled earlier this month.

Schrems’ lawyer, Katharina Raabe-Stuppnig, said: “It’s really important to set ground rules… There are some companies that think they can just ignore them and gain a competitive advantage through this behavior.”

Matt Pollard, a spokesman for Meta, said the company will review the ruling once it is fully published.

“Meta takes data protection very seriously and has invested over five billion euros to embed data protection at the heart of all our products,” he continued. “Everyone who uses Facebook has access to a variety of settings and tools that allow people to manage how we use their information.”

The LGBTQ+ community has previously claimed that the social media company failed to mitigate “extreme anti-trans hate” and profited from posts containing anti-gay slurs.

A GLAAD report published in March claimed that posts, some of which included transphobic slurs and the “groomer” slur and also promoted conversion therapy, were left on meta-platforms despite being marked as hateful content.

“Meta either responded that the posts did not constitute violations or simply took no action,” the report said.

The report followed an open letter from more than 250 celebrities, including Elliot Page and Laverne Cox, in June 2023 that called on Meta to address the “epidemic” of anti-trans hate. GLAAD reported that “extreme anti-trans hate” remained “widespread” in the following months.

Meta has previously said that “hate speech has no place on our platforms,” ​​adding, “We believe that people can use their voice and connect more freely when they do not feel attacked because of their identity.” That’s why we don’t allow hate speech on Facebook, Instagram or Threads.”

Share your thoughts! Let us know in the comments below and remember to keep the conversation respectful.