Zauderer 1

Yoela Zauderer
CST 300 Writing Lab
February 10, 2020

Ethical Implications of Targeted Advertising

Since time immemorial, advertisers have devised methods to sell their wares to the

general public. They have done so via magazine pages, billboards, and mailings, all trying to

capture the demographic population best suited for their products. With the advent of the

internet, this process has taken advantage of a global platform to capture specific data on users

and use it to benefit narrowly targeted marketing.

Websites track internet activity by inserting a cookie onto users’ browsers to collect data.

Cookies store information about individual preferences and buying trends based upon the content

and searches of websites visited. The patterns of behavior generated are highly sought after by

advertisers as they promise higher levels of engagement with specific products (Drell, 2011).

Targeted advertising, otherwise known as behavioral targeting, has become a pervasive, rampant

method in today’s digital age.

Since gathering user data is the crux of targeted advertising, privacy is a critical point of

discussion in this context. As users depend on electronic devices more and more for all aspects

of their lives, from shopping to health records, personalized and sensitive information is being

shared online, creating a detailed profile of each user. This prompts users to seek vigilant

protection of their personal data and voice their rights for privacy.

As technology advances, more questions will arise as to how innovations will be used, to

what extent, and by whom. Answers to these queries will dictate the divide between

advancement and the preservation of individual privacy rights. Even though society may have
 Zauderer 2

the capability to perform certain actions, ethical arguments should determine whether or not to

pursue them, thereby establishing conscious, purposeful decision-making that is rooted in moral

reasoning.

Stakeholders

There are two main groups that maintain a position on the topic of behavioral advertising.

The first view is that of advertising companies who collect user data to provide relevant ad

content online. The second is internet users who do not want their personal information to be

gathered and thereby used to produce targeted ads. Each stakeholder has a unique perspective

reflecting their ideologies and values.

Advertisements are a valuable tool for companies as they promote their products to

viewers as a persuasive tactic for them to make a purchase. Users, as a result, are privy to a host

of free online content due to the fact that websites are supported through advertisements.

Through behavioral targeting, advertisers can customize and personalize the ads to be relevant to

consumers, thereby increasing engagement for the user. While advertisers are profiting from this

practice, users are likewise deriving a benefit by exposure to appealing, relevant ad content. In

today’s age, users have come to expect an individualized interface online. The CMO of

ContextWeb, Rose Ann Haran, says that the goal is to “curate content so that we can drive a

better experience for people online” (Drell, 2011).

Additionally, each website has a privacy policy that states exactly how the website is

using its data. Advertisers are bound by specific legalities, ensuring transparency and security of

their data processing. Websites are legally required to disclose which personal data they collect,

the purpose of gathering the information, and the ways they protect private data. The policies
 Zauderer 3

must also provide instructions of how users can opt-out of having their data collected. This

stakeholder, advertising companies, maintains a claim of policy, stating that they have a right to

do business in a lawful and controlled manner as dictated by privacy regulations

(PrivacyPolicies.com, 2020).

The issue of data collection came to a head in 2018 following the Cambridge Analytica

scandal, in which the company allegedly culled data from 87 million Facebook accounts. Users

accused Facebook of not protecting their data properly, and the world underwent a

metamorphosis from an unsuspecting population to a paranoid public. The founder and CEO of

Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, defended his company, and all advertising companies at large, with

his statement, “Sometimes this means people assume we do things that we don’t do. For

example, we don’t sell people’s data, even though it’s often reported that we do.”

According to Zuckerberg, it is both illogical and detrimental to the business model for a

company to sell user data. While advertising companies get a bad rap, he emphasizes that “while

[his company] does collect information on users, it lets them control how that information is used

for ads and doesn’t use the data without first obtaining consent, in compliance with the European

Union’s GDPR data protection law” (Browne, 2019).

The values of a given company dictate their business model and how they use their

database information. Advertisers look for profit but not at the expense of undermining the

privacy of their clients. Therefore, while their main goal is to provide relevant ad content, a

successful, ethical leadership will do so in a transparent manner while keeping users’ personal

information secure.
 Zauderer 4

There is much at stake for the advertising companies. By forfeiting targeted

advertisements, companies stand to lose the increased revenue generated by the instant click

response of users to targeted ads. Thus, should advertising companies be allowed to collect user

data as long as their intention is clearly stated in their privacy policy?

On the opposing side of the issue is internet users. A possible fallout of the personalized

nature of today’s advertising is the encroachment on individual privacy. Within the confines of a

person’s home, online activity is monitored and reported to others for profit. This directly

contradicts the core of privacy, which people consider a part of their basic human rights. Their

claim of definition maintains that privacy is defined as the freedom from being observed or

watched.

In a study conducted by Pew Research Center, 68% of those surveyed disliked the fact

that their online activity is monitored and studied (Brenner, Purcell, & Rainie, 2012). Users

relate that they are particular about what type of information is being shared with third party

advertisers, as well as how it is shared. An article in Harvard Business Review defines three

qualities that internet users value in regards to their privacy: “trust,” “control,” and

“justification.” Users want to trust that advertising companies are open about what data they are

collecting, want to control who will be able to view this information and know for what purpose

their personal information is being retained (Barasz, John, & Kim, 2018).

The Federal Trade Commission reports: “privacy concerns that the practice raises,

including the invisibility of the data collection to consumers and the risk that the information

collected – including sensitive information regarding health, finances, or children – could fall
 Zauderer 5

into the wrong hands or be used for unanticipated purposes” (Federal Trade Commission, 2009).

This outlines the main position of internet users and their desire for privacy online.

This stakeholder’s argument contains the logical fallacy of a false dichotomy. Online

users think that either advertisers will access all of their data with no controls or limits, or they

will have no access at all. However, there has been a lot of legal work towards a system in which

data used for online advertising can be gathered and stored, while giving users the option to state

their preferences about the use of this data (Harvard University, n.d.). The state of data privacy is

not all or nothing but falls on a continuum between two extremes.

Internet users are subject to a loss of privacy and a sense of security if advertising

agencies have free reign to access personal information online. As part of their basic human

rights, users are entitled to make deliberate choices about what and how information is shared.

Thus, do internet users have a right to protect their own personal information from falling into

nefarious hands?

Argue Stakeholder Positions in Ethical Frameworks

Ethical frameworks are a tool that can be used to evaluate the moral fiber of any issue.

Different schools of thought developed their own ideas about what they deem morally ethical.

The framework of utilitarianism and Kant’s ethics serve as the theories behind the stakeholders’

arguments.

Originally rooted in the philosophy of ancient Greece, the utilitarianism framework

originally defined actions as ethical based upon the least amount of pain that results. Jeremey

Bentham later developed this theory in the 1900s, refining this theory not only as a focus on

pain, but also the consideration of pleasure as an outcome to any action. John Stuart Mill, a pupil
 Zauderer 6

of Bentham, adjusted the theory further by moving away from the idea of pleasure to the broader

concept of happiness.

Utilitarianism is most often applied in situations involving many people, as its principle

idea centers around an action’s propensity to produce the most good for the maximum amount of

people. While it is understood that there will always be a toggle between good and bad as a

result of a given action, utilitarianism favors the deed that produces the most good and the least

damage for the multitudes. This framework depends entirely upon the outcome of an act, looking

ahead at the triggered effects, while simultaneously taking into account a broad scope of all

parties involved (Brown University, n.d.).

Therefore, according to advertisers, utilitarianism proposes that collecting data for

targeted advertising is morally correct as it is good for consumers in that they are receiving

valuable, targeted content based upon their interests, and advertisers are able to achieve better ad

performance via this method. Since this results in the most good for the majority of people, the

consequences determine the morality of this practice, thereby justifying the means for the end

goal. The collection and secure storage of personal data is only a stepping stone along the path of

a goal that will propagate happiness to both stakeholders.

In the late 1700s, a philosopher of note, Immanuel Kant, developed the first deontological

theory based on secular principals, which defines ethics in terms of obligations and duties to act

in accordance with established rules or principles. Kant does not speculate on the outcome of an

action, as it is out of human domain and often unpredictable, but rather pinpoints the universally

accepted morals of an action as the litmus test for ethical integrity.

 Zauderer 7

Kantian ethics is founded upon what is coined “categorical imperatives,” rational

principles that are objective and indisputable. As Kant stated, ​“Act only according to that maxim

by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” In other words, it

is proper to generalize an action only if it meets the criteria for objective morality. Once these

imperatives are rooted within society, then it is every man’s obligation and duty to abide by them

and align his actions accordingly ​(Brown University, n.d.)​.

Internet users believe that they have a right to their own personal privacy and, therefore,

others have a moral duty to protect this right and reject actions that will either detract from or

hinder this right. Even if the outcome is a personalized ad experience that increases value for the

customer, the means, collecting personal data, is empirically wrong. According to this view,

protecting privacy is a “categorical imperative” and must be upheld.

Student Position

Both stakeholders present valid arguments, which highlight the fact that the issue is both

complex and pervasive. My position aligns with the advertising companies; I believe they should

be able to gather data and use the information to create tailor-made ads because users are

informed and have the choice not to participate in online activities. Users are aware that by

visiting a site, they are adhering to the privacy policy set forth. Advertisers have always been

aimed at capturing a targeted demographic, and with the advancements of technology, they have

improved their methods and effectiveness. The transparency of data collection means that people

are aware of this trend and may act accordingly, visiting websites discriminantly and inputting

private information online at their discretion. Behavioral advertisements benefit the companies
 Zauderer 8

and I believe that many consumers, including myself, also enjoy the benefit that advertisements

are relevant and pertinent.

However, the issue of privacy in the technological world should not be ignored. To

resolve this issue further, two suggestions can be advantageous to both parties. First of all, there

should be a focus on the part of the advertising companies to secure the data so that it cannot be

mined and used by the wrong people. Secondly, instead of an opt-out preference for targeted

advertising, there can be an opt-in option to add another layer of transparency for both sides.

Advertisers are entitled to the available technology as the world embraces new and innovative

advancements but they must remain focused on protecting consumer privacy as a basic, human

right that will never change.

 Zauderer 9

References

Barasz, K., John, L. K., & Kim, T. (n.d.). Ads that don’t overstep. Retrieved from

https://hbr.org/2018/01/ads-that-dont-overstep

Brenner, J., Purcell, K., & Rainie, L. (2012, March 9). Main findings. Retrieved from

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2012/03/09/main-findings-11/

Brown University. (n.d.). ​A framework for making ethical decisions.​ Retrieved from

https://www.brown.edu/academics/science-and-technology-studies/framework-making-et

hical-decisions

Browne, R. (2019, January 25). Mark Zuckerberg wrote a 1,000-word op-ed defending

Facebook: ‘People assume we do things we don’t do.’ Retrieved from

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/25/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-defends-use-of-person

al-data-in-wsj-op-ep.html

Drell, L. (2011, April 26). 4 ways behavioral targeting is changing the web. Retrieved from

https://mashable.com/2011/04/26/behavioral-targeting/

Federal Trade Commission​. (2009, February 12). ​FTC staff revises online behavioral

advertising.​ Retrieved from

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2009/02/ftc-staff-revises-online-behavior

al-advertising-principles

Harvard University. (n.d.). ​Privacy & security in targeted advertising.​ Retrieved from

https://crcs.seas.harvard.edu/privacy-security-targeted-advertising

PrivacyPolicies.com. (2020, February 18). ​Privacy policies are legally required.​ Retrieved from

https://www.privacypolicies.com/blog/privacy-policies-legally-required/