The company explained that the way it chose to ‘comply’ with the GDPR – which obliges companies to present justifications (“legal bases”) for saving, processing and transferring personal information of users, and provides them with several options – was to use the justification called “contractual necessity”. According to her, “Facebook and Instagram are personalized by nature, and we believe that providing a unique experience to each user – including the advertisements they see – is a necessary and basic part of this service. It would be very unusual for a social network not to be tailored to the user.” Of course, this statement tries to connect matching the content with matching the advertisements, even though these are two completely different services – one of them is intended for users and the other is intended for businesses.
More in-
Meta clarified that even if it had intended to comply with Ireland’s decision, this would not have helped users – and here it really went to the trouble of pulling out a triple finger to users, when it emphasized that “it is important to note that these decisions do not prevent personalized advertising on our platform,” and that “the insinuation that Meta You will no longer be able to offer personalized advertisements across Europe without obtaining each user’s consent first is incorrect.” She added that the Irish Commission is merely requiring it to change the “lawful basis” it uses to collect information for tailored advertising – and while “consent” is one of those permissions, Meta has no intention of using it.
On the other hand, it claimed – and lied – that it in any case allows users to control the information according to which the advertisements are tailored to them. Admittedly, a page to control the information does exist – but it only contains a fraction of the information: personal status (ie single/married, etc.), education, employer and job description. All other personal details – from address to sexual orientation, along with all the likes used to compile a much more complex profile than “Technology reporter at Ace, high school graduate and seder yeshiva” as proven in the Cambridge Analytica case – are not under the control of the user, but under the sole control of Meta.
Meta has repeated over and over again that even among the regulators in Europe there is no agreement regarding the legality of its conduct, therefore, until there is a final decision on the issue, it does not intend to change anything, and as mentioned will appeal both the fine and the claims of the Irish Commission.