The dangers that big social media platforms pose to democracy, such as the spread of disinformation, polarisation, microtargeting, and manipulative advertising—are well-documented and significant. The question of whether a ban on user profiling for marketing purposes could address these issues is complex but I still don’t understand why a real debate was never started.

What are the potential Benefits of Banning User Profiling for Marketing?

User profiling enables highly targeted advertising, which, as we know, can be exploited to amplify divisive content, spread misinformation, or influence voter behaviour. A ban could reduce the precision and effectiveness of such campaigns, thereby mitigating their impact on public opinion and democratic processes.

Profiling also allows malicious actors to identify and exploit vulnerable groups with tailored disinformation. Restricting profiling could make it harder to deliver customised false narratives, thereby slowing the spread of misleading or harmful content.

Enhanced User Privacy. Banning profiling for marketing would align with stronger data protection principles, such as those enshrined in the GDPR. This could restore user trust in digital platforms and reduce the commodification of personal data.

We could have a massive reduction in polarisation. Algorithmic amplification, driven by profiling, often prioritises engaging but polarising content. Limiting profiling could reduce the echo chamber effect, where users are repeatedly exposed to extreme or one-sided viewpoints.

A ban could reduce the advantage that well-funded actors (e.g., political campaigns, corporations) gain from microtargeting, thereby promoting fairer public discourse.

Seem quite clear what the challenges and Limitations of a ban are. Sure there are enforcement difficulties: Profiling is deeply embedded in the business models of social media platforms. Enforcing a ban would require robust regulatory frameworks, cross-border cooperation, and technical oversight, all of which are challenging to implement consistently.

Obviusly there could be Impact on Legitimate uses, I mean, not all profiling is harmful. For example, personalisation can enhance user experience by delivering relevant content. A blanket ban might disrupt benign or beneficial applications, such as local business advertising or public service announcements.

This would have massive economic Implications for platforms. Social media companies rely heavily on targeted advertising for revenue. This would help the fediverse a lot.

There are some alternative and complementary measures.We could ask stronger transparency and accountability. Mandate platforms to disclose how algorithms and profiling are used, including the criteria for content recommendation and ad targeting. Require independent audits of algorithms to assess their impact on democracy and user rights. for sure a big area of intervation should be the regulation of political Advertising. Implement stricter rules for political ads, such as mandatory disclosure of funding sources, targeting criteria, and the use of profiling. Ban microtargeting for political advertising, as proposed in the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and other regulatory frameworks. We could require platforms to design algorithms that prioritise democratic values, such as pluralism, accuracy, and fairness, over engagement metrics. Introduce “circuit breakers” to limit the viral spread of harmful content, as suggested by some policymakers and researchers.

Important could be empowering users.Provide users with meaningful controls over their data, including the ability to opt out of profiling and access clear explanations of how their data is used. Promote digital literacy initiatives to help users recognise and resist manipulative content.

Also, support independent journalism and public interest media to counterbalance the influence of algorithmically amplified contentaEncourage the development of decentralised social media platforms (e.g., Mastodon, PeerTube) that prioritise user control and reduce reliance on centralised profiling.

Bans on certain forms of targeted advertising (e.g., based on sensitive data like political opinions or sexual orientation). Risk assessments for systemic risks, including impacts on democratic processes. The AI Act further restricts harmful uses of AI-driven profiling, reinforcing the EU’s commitment to mitigating the risks posed by big social media.

So, yes, a ban on user profiling for marketing could be a valuable component of a broader strategy to protect democracy. Why there is basically no conversation about this?