Internal Meta documents reveal a policy that protects high-spending advertisers by modifying automated content moderation practices, raising ethical concerns over ad enforcement fairness.
Meta claimed to use higher spending as a guardrail to avoid mistakenly removing high-reach ads. They insisted that all advertisers are subject to the same standards.
A group labeled as "P95 spenders," who spend over $1,500 daily, were alleged to have exemptions from standard advertising restrictions, which sparked scrutiny over fairness.
Despite claims of using higher advertising expenditure as a shield, Meta's spokesperson insisted that no exemptions exist, emphasizing accountability in advertising and community standards.
Collection
[
|
...
]