Meta aims to remove ad targeting options based on user interactions with content about health, race, political affiliation, religion, and more, by January 19

Meta, the social media company formerly known as Facebook, said on Tuesday that it planned to eliminate advertisers' ability …

New York Times 2021-11-10

Context & Ripple Effects

Meta’s change marks an early boundary on turning users’ engagement with sensitive subjects into ad-audience signals. Later coverage shows that boundary widening from topic-based restrictions to reduced targeting based on gender and in-app activity for teens and, in Europe, a user route to opt out of some highly personalized ads.

The significance is not simply fewer targeting categories: it begins a longer redefinition of which behavioral signals Meta can monetize, especially where political or sensitive-interest advertising draws regulatory scrutiny.

First-order effects

Advertisers lose Meta campaign segments built from users’ interactions with content tied to health, race, politics, religion, and other sensitive topics, forcing them to use broader available audiences.
Meta must remove those options from its ad-buying tools while continuing to sell campaigns without presenting sensitive-content engagement as a targeting input.

Second-order effects

Advertisers seeking narrower audiences shift more campaign design toward non-sensitive signals and creative, a constraint Meta later extended through teen targeting limits.
The removal establishes a practical precedent for users and regulators pressing Meta to limit personalization, reflected in its later opt-out process for some highly personalized ads in the EU.

Third-order effects

If this pattern continues, Meta’s advertising controls will increasingly distinguish between permitted commercial targeting and sensitive or civic inference, rather than treating all engagement data as interchangeable.
Political advertising is likely to become a separately governed category: Meta later barred its generative-AI ad tools for political advertisers and ultimately stopped accepting political, election, and social-issue ads in the EU.

The trend: Meta is moving from broad behavioral targeting toward a more restricted advertising model in which sensitive identity, political activity, and user-controlled personalization receive distinct safeguards.

Discussion

@mikeisaac Rat King on x
Meta removes thousands of ad targeting topics related to sensitive topics like religion, sexual preference and race, among others, across all its ad-backed services (Facebook, Instagram, Messenger and Audience Network) https://www.nytimes.com/...
@raustin_jr Roy Austin, Jr on x
We are removing ad targeting options that relate to topics people may perceive as sensitive. This includes options related to health, race or ethnicity, political affiliation, religion, or sexual orientation. (1/4) Learn more here: https://www.facebook.com/...
@sarafischer Sara Fischer on x
#Breaking; @Facebook parent company @Meta to block ad targeting around topics related to politics, religion, sexual orientation https://www.axios.com/...
@natemcdermott Nathan McDermott on x
It's one thing to do this for ads, but imagine if Meta applied these ad restrictions to page recommendations and posts it puts in users Facebook feeds. It'd probably help lower American divisiveness, but people would likely interact with fewer posts. https://twitter.com/...
@econliberties @econliberties on x
Don't fall for Facebook's latest attempt to trick policymakers and the public into thinking they can right their own wrongs. This does nothing to address the serious market power issues or the business incentives that make Facebook so pernicious. https://www.economicliberties.us/…
@ec_schneider Elena Schneider on x
NEW - Facebook announces new limits to its political ad targeting in new post. Campaigns will no longer be able to target based on race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs. Starts Jan. 19, 2022, fully implemented by March. https://www.facebook.com/...
@samidh @samidh on x
This is an important step, but an even bolder move would've been to agree to a 3rd party technical audit of potential bias in the ad *delivery* system. Modern ad networks now deliver ads so precisely that they may create more bias than ad targeting itself. https://www.nytimes.com…
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
this is already currently the subject of many rumblings in political ads land since Fb started calling organizations this am https://twitter.com/...
@benwessel Ben Wessel on x
Once again, the ads are not the problem (https://www.facebook.com/...). An algorithm based on outrage that leads to this is the problem ⬇️ https://twitter.com/...
@grahammudd Graham Mudd on x
Consulting with civil rights experts, stakeholders and policy makers helped shape our decision. While the tradeoffs are real, we believe this is the right decision and will do everything we can to support impacted customers. (3/3)
@grahammudd Graham Mudd on x
Today we announced that we will be deprecating 1000s of interest targeting options that relate to potentially sensitive topics such as health, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation. While this decision may seem obvious, it wasn't. (1/3) https://twitter.com/...
@grahammudd Graham Mudd on x
There are many very positive use cases for these targeting options. Small businesses use them to market products to specific customers. Non-profits use them to raise funds. Advocacy orgs use them to raise awareness. (2/3)
@cindygallop Cindy Gallop on x
The fact @makelovenotporn, whose mission is to end rape culture (with proof of concept), is banned from advertising on Facebook, as are all female lens sexual health and wellness brands + sex educators, is why I'm building my own adtech to prove a different model for ads online h…
@jigolden Jenna Golden on x
This sounds big, but in reality it is not. Most political advertisers use geo targeting and custom audiences (mapping against their own first party data/voter files.) As long as they can continue to do that, they'll be annoyed yet generally unaffected. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@gregbensinger @gregbensinger on x
Notably Facebook/Meta makes no pledge to stop collecting the data that would allow for such targeted advertising the first place. Wanna stop the targeting? Stop the data hoovering https://www.nytimes.com/...
@michaelwhitney Michael Whitney on x
Removing political affiliation (and presumably adjacent targetings) is going to have huge negative ramifications in the fundraising space https://twitter.com/...
@jesselehrich Jesse Lehrich on x
key caveat: Facebook's algorithm hypertargets ads in problematic ways irrespective of these tags based on a million other data signals. when FB made a similar announcement for teens, ad execs told @KateKayeReports they expected little impact on targeting. https://digiday.com/... …
@esreif Eric Reif on x
This change will have huge ramifications — not just for political campaigns but also advocacy groups, nonprofits, anyone who's doing any cause-based marketing or fundraising, really — while doing absolutely nothing to address Facebook's massive organic content problems. https://t…
@jamesrbuk James Ball on x
Better late than never, though advertisers will I assume find new proxies for these things (the current ones aren't subtle), starting a cat and mouse chase. https://twitter.com/...
@alexhern Alex Hern on x
Whenever Facebook folds like this it's always nice to suddenly reassess years of reporting and realise I was right and they were wrong https://twitter.com/...
@steveolson Steve Olson on x
TBH, this isn't really the problem, but whatever. get your headlines. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@tsenatsaba Saba Tsen'at Mah'derom on x
Whoever is in charge of reviewing these videos must also be held accountable. The account is actually part of a network of accounts that disseminate similar message. https://facebook.com/...
@tsenatsaba Saba Tsen'at Mah'derom on x
If @Meta is doing anything to help the people in Ethiopia, why is this video from July still up? The lady in the video clearly calls for genocide. At 34:44 she even says it in both Amharic & Tigrigna. I have reported this video repeatedly, yet it is still there. @iainlevine https…
@heminator Mark Hemingway on x
Suspect the reason why they're doing this is because ad targeting fuels an industry of encouraging ad boycotts. https://twitter.com/...
@johnbattelle John Battelle on x
This feels like....part of a plan. https://twitter.com/...
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
this will make folks happy who are concerned about ad buyers who abuse these categories to spam/harass users but it has also rankled advocacy groups and businesses that rely on many of the targeting capabilities to bolster their pages/groups/biz
@deitaone @deitaone on x
*Facebook to Ban Ad Targeting for Politics and Other Sensitive Issues — Meta Statement *Facebook Targeting Ban to Take Effect Jan. 19 — Meta Statement
@shanegoldmacher Shane Goldmacher on x
Facebook is eliminating advertisers' ability to target people with promotions based on their interactions with content related to health, race and ethnicity, political affiliation, religion, sexual orientation and thousands of other topics. https://www.nytimes.com/...

Chronicles