Technology

59300 readers

4501 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

703

EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy (www.theregister.com)

submitted 6 months ago by ForgottenFlux@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The EU's Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising.

In October last year, the social media giant said it would be possible to pay Meta to stop Instagram or Facebook feeds of personalized ads and prevent it from using personal data for marketing for users in the EU, EEA, or Switzerland. Meta then announced a subscription model of €9.99/month on the web or €12.99/month on iOS and Android for users who did not want their personal data used for targeted advertising.

At the time, Felix Mikolasch, data protection lawyer at noyb, said: "EU law requires that consent is the genuine free will of the user. Contrary to this law, Meta charges a 'privacy fee' of up to €250 per year if anyone dares to exercise their fundamental right to data protection."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Plopp@lemmy.world 43 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I mean tracking exists because advertisers pay more for targeted ads, based on the tracking. I'd rather prefer it if the EU just made tracking illegal. Deal with the problem at its root.

Also maybe ban ads that track clicking on them (to then give a bigger payout). Advertisers should pay for simply showing me the ad and putting their brand/product in my brain.
And if we remove the option for targeted ads based on user tracking, the price for plain and simple old school ads might rise again, which is a very good thing for websites and users.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 20 points 6 months ago

We have to be real here, that nobody has ever really consented to being tracked in the way these giant sites do it. Nobody has looked at that form and gone "I'm perfectly OK with 1698 different advertising agencies knowing my real name and interests, every time I'm online"

They go "yeah, whatever, get that popup the fuck out of my face so I can read this fascinating article about some 19 year-old pop star's boob job".

Part of it should be legislation. Another part should be browsers rendering fingerprinting to be completely ineffective.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 6 months ago

Opinion: "Personalized ads" are a ruse and don't actually work better than regular ads. They only have a higher click-through rate because they are more often disguised as normal content on the platform and people are simply being tricked into clicking on them.