A human rights advocate, Tanya O’Carroll, has successfully compelled social media company Meta to refrain from using her data for targeted advertising. This resolution is part of a settlement following an individual challenge she initiated against Meta’s practices of tracking and profiling, which began in 2022.
O’Carroll contended that a legal entitlement to object to the use of personal data for direct marketing, as stipulated in U.K. and E.U. data protection laws, along with an absolute right that personal data should not be processed for such purposes if the individual objects, obligated Meta to respect her objection and cease tracking and profiling her for its targeted advertisements.
Meta disputed this claim, arguing that its “personalized ads” do not constitute direct marketing. The case was scheduled for a hearing in the English High Court; however, the settlement concluded the legal proceedings.
For O’Carroll, the outcome is a personal victory, as Meta is required to stop using her data for ad targeting during her use of their services. She also believes that the settlement establishes a precedent that could empower others to assert their right to object to direct marketing, compelling the tech company to honor their privacy.
In an interview with TechCrunch, O’Carroll expressed that she was compelled to accept the settlement once Meta conceded to her demands to halt the processing of her data for targeted advertisements. She noted that pursuing the litigation and potentially losing could have resulted in significant financial repercussions.
O’Carroll described the outcome as a “bittersweet victory,” stating that she achieved her goal to demonstrate the existence and applicability of the right to object concerning Meta’s and other internet companies’ business models. However, she acknowledged that Meta did not accept liability and views it as merely settling with an individual.
Although the E.U. has established robust legal safeguards for personal data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—the cornerstone of O’Carroll’s legal challenge—enforcing these privacy laws against surveillance-driven advertising models like Meta’s has been a relentless and challenging task.
While Meta has incurred numerous GDPR fines, including some of the most substantial privacy penalties, its core business model based on surveillance without explicit consent has been more resilient to change. Recent enforcement actions indicate gradual progress in Europe, and O’Carroll’s case highlights the potential for privacy advocacy.
O’Carroll expressed optimism due to the intervention of the U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in the case, which supported her stance convincingly. She suggested that other Meta users who also object to data processing might now have a better chance of receiving ICO support if Meta refuses their requests.
She anticipates that Meta might adopt a “pay or consent” model in the U.K., similar to its approach in the EU, which would require users to either consent to tracking or pay for ad-free services. O’Carroll confirmed that, in her case, she will not be required to pay for the tracking-free access to Meta’s services, although she could not disclose full details.
