Difference between revisions of "Affinity Profiling and Discrimination by Association in Online Behavioural Advertising (Q3245)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created claim: comment (P126): By claiming not to collect or infer sensitive data, but rather to only assume an affinity or interests, companies might not need to adhere to the higher protection afforded to sensitive data processing in the GDPR (Art 9)) |
(Changed claim: comment (P126): Indirect discrimination provides a more promising alternative route to raise claims against advertisers. Targeting source or “look alike” audiences, while not based on protected grounds, can still lead to differential results for protected groups.) |
||
| Property / comment | Property / comment | ||
| - | + | Indirect discrimination provides a more promising alternative route to raise claims against advertisers. Targeting source or “look alike” audiences, while not based on protected grounds, can still lead to differential results for protected groups. | |
Revision as of 12:28, 9 January 2020
scholarly article
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English |
Affinity Profiling and Discrimination by Association in Online Behavioural Advertising
|
scholarly article
|
Statements
Even good faith and well-intentioned practices can amount to discrimination if the adverse result of the treatment disproportionately affects members of protected groups in comparison with others in a similar situation. Even with the best intentions platform providers can commit direct or indirect discrimination
0 references
Indirect discrimination provides a more promising alternative route to raise claims against advertisers. Targeting source or “look alike” audiences, while not based on protected grounds, can still lead to differential results for protected groups.
0 references