View attachment 34383View attachment 34383
Advertisements for Instagram were purposefully displayed on YouTube to users under the age of 18, despite the fact that doing so is against the regulations.
This is yet another instance of the European Commission taking action against large technology companies for their targeting of children. According to the Financial Times, the authorities of the EU have questioned Google in an effort to obtain additional information regarding a covert advertising agreement with Meta that targeted Instagram advertisements directed at children on YouTube.A formal inquiry has not yet been opened by the Commission; nevertheless, it is currently gathering evidence that it sought in October. This information includes internal discussions, presentations, emails, and other materials that are relevant to the advertisements on YouTube. This material was acquired by Google during an internal investigation that was given the codename "Tangerine Owl."
That Google employees were employing a workaround to allow advertisements to be directed to individuals under the age of 18 was originally exposed by the Financial Times in August. Given that Google has for a long time prohibited advertising directed toward minors, this was a major no-no. On the other hand, these Google personnel instructed Meta to target advertisements to a category that was referred to as "unknown," as internal data revealed that this group had a significant number of individuals who were under the age of 18. Following the successful introduction of a trial advertising program in Canada, the two companies collaborated with the marketing agency Spark Foundry to expand the initiative to the United States. Following the publication of the public study, the companies decided to abandon their ambition to expand beyond the two nations and to incorporate additional Meta platforms.
It is not the first time that Google and Meta have been in trouble for their advertising methods; in fact, this is nothing new. Both the European Commission and the Competition and Market Authority of the United Kingdom conducted antitrust investigations into the two companies in 2022; however, both organizations ultimately decided to close their respective cases due to the lack of evidence.
