Pay for Privacy? The Meta-EU Tussle to Balance Privacy and Advertising
Introduction
Privacy has become a concern for netizens and social media companies have access to a user’s data and the ability to use the said data as they see fit. Meta’s business model, where they rely heavily on collecting and processing user data to deliver targeted advertising, has been under scrutiny. The conflict between Meta and the EU traces back to the enactment of GDPR in 2018. Meta is facing numerous fines for not following through with the regulation and mainly failing to obtain explicit consent for data processing under Chapter 2, Article 7 of the GDPR. ePrivacy Regulation, which focuses on digital communication and digital data privacy, is the next step in the EU’s arsenal to protect user privacy and will target the cookie policies and tracking tech crucial to Meta's ad-targeting mechanism. Meta’s core revenue stream is sourced from targeted advertising which requires vast amounts of data for the creation of a personalised experience and is scrutinised by the EU.
Pay for Privacy Model and its Implications with Critical Analysis
Meta came up with a solution to deal with the privacy issue - ‘Pay or Consent,’ a model that allows users to opt out of data-driven advertising by paying a subscription fee. The platform would offer users a choice between free, ad-supported services and a paid privacy-enhanced experience which aligns with the GDPR and potentially reduces regulatory pressure on Meta.
Meta presently needs to assess the economic feasibility of this model and come up with answers for how much a user would be willing to pay for the privacy offered and shift Meta’s monetisation from ad-driven profits to subscription revenues. This would have a direct impact on Meta’s advertisers who use Meta as a platform for detailed user data for targeted advertising, and would potentially decrease ad revenue and innovate other monetisation strategies.
For the users, increased privacy and greater control of data aligning with global privacy concerns would be a potential outcome. While users will undoubtedly appreciate the option to avoid tracking, the suggestion does beg the question that the need to pay might become a barrier. This could possibly divide users between cost-conscious and privacy-conscious segments. Setting up a reasonable price point is necessary for widespread adoption of the model.
For the regulators and the industry, a new precedent would be set in the tech industry and could influence other companies’ approaches to data privacy. Regulators might welcome this move and encourage further innovation in privacy-respecting business models.
The affordability and fairness of the ‘pay or consent’ model could create digital inequality if privacy comes at a digital cost or even more so as a luxury. The subscription model would also need clarifications as to what data would be collected and how it would be used for non-advertising purposes. In terms of market competition, competitors might use and capitalise on Meta’s subscription model by offering free services with privacy guarantees which could further pressure Meta to refine its offerings to stay competitive. According to the EU, the model needs to provide a third way for users who have ads but are a result of non-personalisation advertising.
Meta has further expressed a willingness to explore various models to address regulatory concerns and enhance user privacy. Their recent actions in the form of pilot programs for testing the pay-for-privacy model is one example. Meta is actively engaging with EU regulators to find mutually acceptable solutions and to demonstrate its commitment to compliance while advocating for business models that sustain innovation. Meta executives have emphasised the importance of user choice and transparency in their future business strategies.
Future Impact Outlook
- The Meta-EU tussle over privacy is a manifestation of broader debates about data protection and business models in the digital age.
- The EU's stance on Meta’s ‘pay or consent’ model and any new regulatory measures will shape the future landscape of digital privacy, leading to other jurisdictions taking cues and potentially leading to global shifts in privacy regulations.
- Meta may need to iterate on its approach based on consumer preferences and concerns. Competitors and tech giants will closely monitor Meta’s strategies, possibly adopting similar models or innovating new solutions. And the overall approach to privacy could evolve to prioritise user control and transparency.
Conclusion
Consent is the cornerstone in matters of privacy and sidestepping it violates the rights of users. The manner in which tech companies foster a culture of consent is of paramount importance in today's digital landscape. As the exploration by Meta in the ‘pay or consent’ model takes place, it faces both opportunities and challenges in balancing user privacy with business sustainability. This situation serves as a critical test case for the tech industry, highlighting the need for innovative solutions that respect privacy while fostering growth with the specificity of dealing with data protection laws worldwide, starting with India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, of 2023.
Reference:
- https://ciso.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/grc/eu-tells-meta-to-address-consumer-fears-over-pay-for-privacy/111946106
- https://www.wired.com/story/metas-pay-for-privacy-model-is-illegal-says-eu/
- https://edri.org/our-work/privacy-is-not-for-sale-meta-must-stop-charging-for-peoples-right-to-privacy/
- https://fortune.com/2024/04/17/meta-pay-for-privacy-rejected-edpb-eu-gdpr-schrems/
Related Blogs
Introduction
The development of high-speed broadband internet in the 90s triggered a growth in online gaming, particularly in East Asian countries like South Korea and China. This culminated in the proliferation of competitive video game genres, which had otherwise existed mostly in the form of high-score and face-to-face competitions at arcades. The online competitive gaming market has only become bigger over the years, with a separate domain for professional competition, called esports. This industry is projected to reach US$4.3 billion by 2029, driven by advancements in gaming technology, increased viewership, multi-million dollar tournaments, professional leagues, sponsorships, and advertising revenues. However, the industry is still in its infancy and struggles with fairness and integrity issues. It can draw lessons in regulation from the traditional sports market to address these challenges for uniform global growth.
The Growth of Esports
The appeal of online gaming lies in its design innovations, social connectivity, and accessibility. Its rising popularity has culminated in online gaming competitions becoming an industry, formally organised into leagues and tournaments with reward prizes reaching up to millions of dollars. Professional teams now have coaches, analysts and psychologists supporting their players. For scale, the 2024 ESports World Cup (EWS) held in Saudi Arabia had the largest combined prize pool of over US$60 million. Such tournaments can be viewed in arenas and streamed online, and by 2025, around 322.7 million people are forecast to be occasional viewers of esports events.
According to Statista, esports revenue is expected to demonstrate an annual growth rate (CAGR 2024-2029) of 6.59%, resulting in a projected market volume of US$5.9 billion by 2029. Esports has even been recognised in traditional sporting events, debuting as a medal sport in the Asian Games 2022. In 2024, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced the Olympic Esports Games, with the inaugural event set to take place in 2025 in Saudi Arabia. Hosting esports events such as the EWS is expected to boost tourism and the host country’s local economy.
The Challenges of Esports Regulation
While the esports ecosystem provides numerous opportunities for growth and partnerships, its under-regulation presents challenges. Due to the lack of a single governing body like the IOC for the Olympics or FIFA for football to lay down centralised rules, the industry faces certain challenges, such as :
- Integrity issues: Esports are not immune to cheating attempts. Match-fixing, using advanced software hacks, doping (e.g., Adderall use), and the use of other illegal aids are common. DOTA, Counter-Strike, and Overwatch tournaments are particularly susceptible to cheating scandals.
- Players’ Rights: The teams that contractually own professional players provide remuneration and exercise significant control over athletes, who face issues like overwork, a short-lived career, stress, the absence of collective bargaining forums, instability, etc.
- Fragmented National Regulations: While multiple countries have recognised esports as a sport, policies on esports governance and allied regulation vary within and across borders. For example, age restrictions and laws on gambling, taxation, labour, and advertising differ by country. This can create confusion, risks and extra costs, impacting the growth of the ecosystem.
- Cybersecurity Concerns: The esports industry carries substantial prize pools and has growing viewer engagement, which makes it increasingly vulnerable to Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, malware, ransomware, data breaches, phishing, and account hijacking. Tournament organisers must prioritise investments in secure network infrastructure, perform regular security audits, encrypt sensitive data, implement network monitoring, utilise API penetration testing tools, deploy intrusion detection systems, and establish comprehensive incident response and mitigation plans.
Proposals for Esports Regulation: Lessons from Traditional Sports
To address the most urgent challenges to the esports industry as outlined above, the following interventions, drawing on the governance and regulatory frameworks of traditional sports, can be made:
- Need for a Centralised Esports Governing Body: Unlike traditional sports, the esports landscape lacks a Global Sports Organisation (GSO) to oversee its governance. Instead, it is handled de facto by game publishers with industry interests different from those of traditional GSOs. Publishers’ primary source of revenue is not esports, which means they can adopt policies unsuitable for its growth but good for their core business. Appointing a centralised governing body with the power to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders and manage issues like unregulated gambling, athlete health, and integrity challenges is a logical next step for this industry.
- Gambling/Betting Regulations: While national laws on gambling/betting vary, GSOs establish uniform codes of conduct that bind participants contractually, ensuring consistent ethical standards across jurisdictions. Similar rules in esports are managed by individual publishers/ tournament organisers, leading to inconsistencies and legal grey areas. The esports ecosystem needs standardised regulation to preserve fair play codes and competitive integrity.
- Anti-Doping Policies: There is increasing adderall abuse among young players to enhance performance with the rising monetary stakes in esports. The industry must establish a global framework similar to the World Anti-Doping Code, which, in conjunction with eight international standards, harmonises anti-doping policies across all traditional sports and countries in the world. The esports industry should either adopt this or develop its own policy to curb stimulant abuse.
- Norms for Participant Health: Professional players start around age 16 or 17 and tend to retire around 24. They may be subjected to rigorous practice hours and stringent contracts by the teams that own them. There is a need for international norm-setting by a federation overseeing the protection of underage players. Enforcement of these norms can be one of the responsibilities of a decentralised system comprising country and state-level bodies. This also ensures fair play governance.
- Respect and Diversity: While esports is technologically accessible, it still has room for better representation of diverse gender identities, age groups, abilities, races, ethnicities, religions, and sexual orientations. Embracing greater diversity and inclusivity would benefit the industry's growth and enhance its potential to foster social connectivity through healthy competition.
Conclusion
The development of the world’s first esports island in Abu Dhabi gives impetus to the rapidly growing esports industry with millions of fans across the globe. To sustain this momentum, stakeholders must collaborate to build a strong governance framework that protects players, supports fans, and strengthens the ecosystem. By learning from traditional sports, esports can establish centralised governance, enforce standardised anti-doping measures, safeguard athlete rights, and promote inclusivity, especially for young and diverse communities. Embracing regulation and inclusivity will not only enhance esports' credibility but also position it as a powerful platform for unity, creativity, and social connection in the digital age.
Resources
- https://www.statista.com/outlook/amo/esports/worldwide
- https://www.statista.com/statistics/490480/global-esports-audience-size-viewer-type/
- https://asoworld.com/blog/global-esports-market-report-2024/#:~:text=A%20key%20driver%20of%20this%20growth%20is%20the%20Sponsorship%20%26%20Advertising,US%24288.9%20million%20in%202024.
- https://lawschoolpolicyreview.com/2023/12/28/a-case-for-recognising-professional-esports-players-as-employees-of-their-game-publisher/
- https://levelblue.com/blogs/security-essentials/the-hidden-risks-of-esports-cybersecurity-on-the-virtual-battlefield
- https://medium.com/@heyimJoost/esports-governance-and-its-failures-9ac7b3ec37ea
- https://www.google.com/search?q=adderall+abuse+in+esports&oq=adderall+abuse+in+esports&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRiPAjIHCAIQIRiPAtIBCDU2MDdqMGo5qAIAsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
- https://americanaddictioncenters.org/blog/esports-adderall-abuse#:~:text=A%202020%20piece%20by%20the,it%20because%20everyone%20was%20using
Executive Summary:
An alleged video is making the rounds on the internet featuring Ranveer Singh criticizing the Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Government. But after examining the video closely it revealed that it has been tampered with to change the audio. In fact, the original videos posted by different media outlets actually show Ranveer Singh praising Varanasi, professing his love for Lord Shiva, and acknowledging Modiji’s role in enhancing the cultural charms and infrastructural development of the city. Differences in lip synchronization and the fact that the original video has no sign of criticizing PM Modi show that the video has been potentially manipulated in order to spread misinformation.
Claims:
The Viral Video of Bollywood actor Ranveer Singh criticizing Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the Video we divided the video into keyframes and reverse-searched one of the images, we landed on another video of Ranveer Singh with lookalike appearance, posted by an Instagram account named, “The Indian Opinion News''. In the video Ranveer Singh talks about his experience of visiting Kashi Vishwanath Temple with Bollywood actress Kriti Sanon. When we watched the Full video we found no indication of criticizing PM Modi.
Taking a cue from this we did some keyword search to find the full video of the interview. We found many videos uploaded by media outlets but none of the videos indicates criticizing PM Modi as claimed in the viral video.
Ranveer Singh shared his thoughts about how he feels about Lord Shiva, his opinions on the city and the efforts undertaken by the Prime Minister Modi to keep history and heritage of Varanasi alive as well as the city's ongoing development projects. The discrepancy in the viral video clip is clearly seen when we look at it closely. The lips are not in synchronization with the words which we can hear. It is clearly seen in the original video that the lips are in perfect synchronization with the words of audio. Upon lack of evidence to the claim made and discrepancies in the video prove that the video was edited to misrepresent the original interview of Bollywood Actor Ranveer Singh. Hence, the claim made is misleading and false.
Conclusion:
The video that claims Ranveer Singh criticizing PM Narendra Modi is not genuine. Further investigation shows that it has been edited by changing the audio. The original footage actually shows Singh speaking positively about Varanasi and Modi's work. Differences in lip-syncing and upon lack of evidence highlight the danger of misinformation created by simple editing. Ultimately, the claim made is false and misleading.
- Claim: A viral featuring Ranveer Singh criticizing the Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Government.
- Claimed on: X (formerly known as Twitter)
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
Executive Summary:
The viral video circulating on social media about the Indian men’s 4x400m relay team recently broke the Asian record and qualified for the finals of the world Athletics championship. The fact check reveals that this is not a recent event but it is from the World World Athletics Championships, August 2023 that happened in Budapest, Hungary. The Indian team comprising Muhammed Anas Yahiya, Amoj Jacob, Muhammed Ajmal Variyathodi, and Rajesh Ramesh, clocked a time of 2 minutes 59.05 seconds, finishing second behind the USA and breaking the Asian record. Although they performed very well in the heats, they only got fifth place in the finals. The video is being reuploaded with false claims stating its a recent record.
Claims:
A recent claim that the Indian men’s 4x400m relay team set the Asian record and qualified to the world finals.
Fact Check:
In the recent past, a video of the Indian Men’s 4x400m relay team which set a new Asian record is viral on different Social Media. Many believe that this is a video of the recent achievement of the Indian team. Upon receiving the posts, we did keyword searches based on the input and we found related posts from various social media. We found an article published by ‘The Hindu’ on August 27, 2023.
According to the article, the Indian team competed in the World Athletics Championship held in Budapest, Hungary. During that time, the team had a very good performance. The Indian team, which consisted of Muhammed Anas Yahiya, Amoj Jacob, Muhammed Ajmal Variyathodi, and Rajesh Ramesh, completed the race in 2:58.47 seconds, coming second after the USA in the event.
The earlier record was 3.00.25 which was set in 2021.
This was a new record in Asia, so it was a historic moment for India. Despite their great success, this video is being reshared with captions that implies this is a recent event, which has raised confusion. We also found various social media posts posted on Aug 26, 2023. We also found the same video posted on the official X account of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the caption of the post reads, “Incredible teamwork at the World Athletics Championships!
Anas, Amoj, Rajesh Ramesh, and Muhammed Ajmal sprinted into the finals, setting a new Asian Record in the M 4X400m Relay.
This will be remembered as a triumphant comeback, truly historical for Indian athletics.”
This reveals that this is not a recent event but it is from the World World Athletics Championships, August 2023 that happened in Budapest, Hungary.
Conclusion:
The viral video of the recent news about the Indian men’s 4x400m relay team breaking the Asian record is not true. The video was from August 2023 that happened at the World Athletics Championships, Budapest. The Indian team broke the Asian record with 2 minutes 59.05 seconds in second position while the US team obtained first position with a timing of 2 minutes 58.47 seconds. However, the video circulated projecting as a recent event is misleading and false.
- Claim: Recent achievement of the Indian men's 4x400m relay team broke the Asian record and qualified for the World finals.
- Claimed on: X, LinkedIn, Instagram
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
