The organization Equal Rights Center (ERC) filed a lawsuit against Meta on Tuesday alleging that it unlawfully discriminated against Black Facebook and Instagram users by disproportionately advertising for-profit colleges and universities to Black users, while marketing public colleges and universities to white users.
ERC argued in its complaint that Meta’s discriminatory marketing practices were unlawful because they violated both the District of Columbia Human Rights Act (DCHRA) and the DC Consumer Protection Procedures Act (CPPA). The civil rights organization asserted that Meta collected data from third party sites and apps — including race demographic information from the ACT college entrance exam site—and from its own Facebook and Instagram to analyze user behavior. Meta then used that data to create personalized ads for users based on their website, app, and social media use.
Meta’s marketing strategies have been particularly harmful to Black communities, according to ERC, because Meta denied Black users the chance to explore public college and university opportunities while they promoted such opportunities to white users. The complaint further averred that for-profit colleges and universities often charge higher tuition rates and provide fewer post-graduate job opportunities, which puts Black communities at a disadvantage as compared to their white counterparts. In sum, this has resulted in unlawful discrimination against Black communities in violation of the DCHRA.
In addition to unlawfully discriminating against Black users, ERC says that Meta has also engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices in violation of the CPPA. Specifically, the complaint accused Meta of promising to deliver users a “valuable and relevant personalized” ad experience when it has instead “[made] ad delivery decisions based on race.” Moreover, the ERC argued that Meta claimed to offer users goods and services that would benefit them, but the goods and services had the opposite effect. To that end, ERC asserted that Meta boasted an advertising system that was of a “particular standard, quality, grade, or style that it [was] not.” ERC demanded in its complaint a jury trial and sought to prevent Meta from engaging in its current marketing practices in violation of the DCHRA and the CPPA.
Meta explains in its marketing policy how it uses tools called Meta Pixel and Facebook SDK to amass user data from businesses. This data supplies Meta with information about user website interactions, purchases, and app usage. Facebook states that it uses that data to cultivate a personalized experience by showing users ads, topics, and events that match their online activity. This is also known as “behavioral marketing.”
Digital redlining has surged in recent years, causing human rights groups to spearhead projects aimed at combating digital discrimination, such as the Digital Justice Initiative. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has called this practice the “new frontier of discrimination” in that online ad-targeting has been shown to mirror societal disparities that have historically prevented certain communities from accessing opportunities afforded to other groups. Disparities in housing, employment, education, and legal system access are some of the major issues plaguing modern society, made worse by digital redlining. ACLU states that online and offline discrimination can be equally harmful to marginalized communities because users are being cut off from potentially life-changing opportunities. The ACLU has in the past filed amicus briefs against Meta alongside other rights groups, urging courts to hold social media platforms and online advertisers accountable for their involvement in digital redlining. The groups have emphasized that redlining is illegal both on and offline, and that tech giants should be held to the same Constitutional standards as they would be offline.
