LISA Groningen

Political campaigning has seen a shift from rallies, to social media campaigns, to micro-targeted advertisements, especially considering the Covid-19 pandemic. Micro-targeting became the preferred method of advertising of Dutch political parties during the recent elections in 2021. Online political micro-targeting refers to the mass collection of data and analyzing an individual’s digital footprint which is then put through predictive classification algorithms to best target an individual (strategic targeting) to, for example, support a specific candidate 1 . Micro-targeting can have many goals but these generally fall under persuasion, to inform and to mobilize, or to dissuade, to confuse and to demobilize.2 Seeing how micro-targeting could have both good and bad repercussions shows the extensive means for which it could be used. In the Netherlands it was proven that the collection of data for micro-targeting was occurring through tracking cookies on political party websites but also through Facebook.3 Facebook allowing the collection of data for third parties to then influence voters is not novel as this took place in the United States of America previously, by a third party known as Cambridge Analytica.4 Most of the targeted ads were then seen in places such as Facebook. Facebook has become a hub for such practices because it is easier to find ‘lookalike audiences’ due to the personal information shared on the platform.5 An example not involving Facebook in the Netherlands involves the left-wing party DENK who targeted individuals with a cheap sim-card known for making out of EU-calls to try and gain support for their pro-immigrant stance.6 Micro-targeted advertisements are an example of processing personal data for electoral purposes as the marketing companies that collect the data or place the tracking cookies are collecting and processing data that would allow for the direct identifiability of an individual. It was recently also recognized as a point of attention for the Dutch Data Protection Authority due to the controversy surrounding Cambridge Analytica, the rise of micro-targeting in the Netherlands and the danger that arises with monitoring people’s behavior online.7

To understand the scope of micro-targeting it is also important to understand how it is legislated on various levels. The GDPR, which concerns data protection, does not have any specific provision on micro-targeting. However, there are very strict provisions on the processing of specific categories of personal data, such as those collected when micro-targeting is present and data regarding political opinion. Such categories are not allowed to be processed, yet political parties find a loophole by the processing of data of individuals that frequent their site, or page or when explicit consent is given.8 There are also specific rules on tracking cookies, which are used in the Netherlands, through the ePrivacy Directive, this is also controlled through consent.9 In the Netherlands, there are no laws regulating the type of political content that can be broadcast during elections including advertisements, however there are now discussion of introducing a new bill that will improve transparency with regards to micro-targeting.10

In order to discuss the repercussions of processing personal data for electoral purposes a political theory approach will be applied. According to David Held, political theory is broad and generally refers to “a network of concepts and generalizations about political life involving ideas, assumptions and statements about the nature, purpose and key features of government, state and society, and the political capabilities of human beings.”11  One of the main points of investigation in political theory is democracy, and what different pillars are needed to uphold a democracy. Therefore the question arises: to what extent is processing of personal data for electoral purposes, specifically through micro-targeting, in line with the political theory of democracy? 

Democracy can be outlined in multiple ways.12 Nevertheless, there is a general consensus that democratic theory revolves around competitive elections.13 Part of the democratic theory are principles such as transparency and accountability which are then aimed at protecting rights which ensure a democratic society such as the freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom to vote.14 Competitive elections, or elections without manipulation are fundamental to a democratic society because it implies the protection of the greater values of democracy.15  The angle is an important one to analyze because through micro-targeted advertisements there comes a lack of transparency in how the different political parties are using personal data to manipulate the outcome of elections, in term making the elections less democratic. 

To be able to determine if political micro-targeting genuinely poses a threat to democracy, what exactly makes up the term democracy must be distinguished. One of the aspects that have already been distinguished is the concept of competitive elections.16 In this case, competitive elections refers to the idea that the elections take place without excessive manipulation and all parties are given the same opportunity to participate in political discourse.17 The elections are free and fair. Micro-targeting calls into question the extent to which the elections are then in fact free and fair. If one party uses, or abuses, micro-targeting while the other does not use it all, the first party is getting more exposure in turn subconsciously manipulating the voter to vote in favor of them. This depicts an unfair advantage that one party would have over the other, making the elections not free or fair by principle. On the other hand, if one party is campaigning more than the other this would not be seen as diminishing the fairness of elections. The reason that this in reality does create unfair elections is because of how precise the targeting and manipulation can get through the processing of personal data. Micro-targeting is such a niche form of political advertising that it does reduce the competitiveness and fairness of elections. 

Elections are the foundation of democracy because they are the basis for democratic legitimacy, it allows civil society to have a say in who is representing, and governing them, reflecting the voter’s will.18 The legitimacy of elections can be questioned when micro-targeting is involved because of the voter manipulation which takes place. The chipping away at the legitimacy of elections happens very subtly with micro-targeting because for the majority of the time it will be unbeknownst to the voter that they are even being targeted. A study conducted by Ronald Epstein about the ‘Search Engine Manipulation Effect’ shows the extent to which undecided voters can be influenced to lean a certain political direction.19 The study shows how a 50/50 split between two parties for voters can turn into a 90/10 split.20 Undecided voters do not benefit the democratic process, as they would generally not vote, damaging the popular participation, however the means used to influence voters is one not fitting of the democratic process. Using highly targeted advertisements drawn up by the processing of personal data causes for manipulation making elections within the democratic theory less legitimate. 

A contradicting view is that although micro-targeting calls for the processing of personal data, this can be justified. One of the important factors of democracy that is ensured and shown through elections is popular participation, where the will of the majority is represented. For the legitimacy of elections and popular participation the number of citizens voting is crucial.21 If more people vote, the will of the people can be better represented, or represents the will of a larger majority of people. Micro-targeting comes into play here, because although personal data is being processed to target certain audiences this is in the name of public interest, as it informs people of political parties that align with their interests based on their personal information collected. Although this seems like a contradictory way to gain support in reality it would allow for some people who are not politically active or do now know much about politics to be matched with a political party through algorithms that determine their match to a party based on their digital presence.22 Therefore, micro-targeting increases popular participation in elections which strengthens democracy. 

In conclusion, micro-targeting poses a threat to the democratic process because of the manipulation that occurs come election time. Although, the voter turnout can be increased by micro-targeting because of the decreased number of undecided voters, it comes at the cost of competitive, fair and legitimate elections. This causes for some confusion, as micro-targeting increases popular participation which ensures legitimacy, however micro-targeting threatens legitimacy which inherently causes for less fair and free elections. This lack of a homogenous determination of the threat that micro-targeting poses is dangerous. Because if it cannot be decided if, or to what extent, micro-targeting, through the processing of personal data, poses a threat to democracy there can be no legislation passed to minimize the damage. Therefore, in practice, this is not seen as a large issue yet as States either have lenient or no legislation pertaining to the processing of personal data in reference to elections. It has recently become a point of attention for many national Data Protection Authorities, meaning that this issue is finally being brought to light.23 Regulating the political weight that Big Tech companies can carry, through micro-targeting, must be defined, especially with the pace at which technology is advancing. 

1. Lennart J Krotzek, ‘Inside The Voter’S Mind: The Effect Of Psychometric Microtargeting On Feelings Toward And Propensity To Vote For A Candidate’ (2019) 13 International Journal of Communication.
2. Tom Dobber, Ronan Ó Fathaigh and Frederik J. Zuiderveen Borgesius, ‘The Regulation Of Online Political Micro-Targeting In Europe’ (2019) 8 Internet Policy Review.
3. Haye Hazenberg and Jeroen van den Hoven, ‘Micro-Targeting And ICT Media In The Dutch Parliamentary System: Technological Changes In Dutch Democracy’ (2018) <https://www.delftdesignforvalues.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Micro-Targeting-and-ICT-media-in-Dutch-Parliamentary-System-public.pdf> accessed 11 February 2022.
4. David Beraldo, Stefania Milan and Jeroen de Vos, ‘Political Advertising Exposed: Tracking Facebook Ads In The 2021 Dutch Elections’ [2021] Internet Policy Review <https://policyreview.info/articles/news/political-advertising-exposed-tracking-facebook-ads-2021-dutch-elections/1543> accessed 11 February 2022. 
5. Dobber, T., Trilling, D., Helberger, N., & de Vreese, C. H. (2018). Spiraling downward: The reciprocal relation between attitude toward political behavioral targeting and privacy concerns. New Media & Society, 21(6), 1212–1231.
6. ibid 2
7. ‘Focus AP 2020-2023: Dataprotectie In Een Digitale Samenleving’ (Autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl, 2020) <https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/sites/default/files/atoms/files/focus_ap_202-2023_groot.pdf> accessed 11 February 2022.
8. The General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679.
9. Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive 2002/58/EC.
10. Tom Dobber, Ronan Ó Fathaigh and Frederik J. Zuiderveen Borgesius, ‘The Regulation Of Online Political Micro-Targeting In Europe’ (2019) 8 Internet Policy Review.
11.  David Held ed., Political Theory Today 1991.
12. Jay Steinmetz, Politics, Power And Purpose: An Orientation To Political Science (FHSU Digital Press 2022).
13. Rikki Dean, Jean-Paul Gagnon and Hans Asenbaum, ‘What Is Democratic Theory?’ (2019) 6 Democratic Theory <https://www.berghahnjournals.com/view/journals/democratic-theory/6/2/dt060201.xml> accessed 11 February 2022.
14. Democracy (Stanford Encyclopedia Of Philosophy)’ (Plato.stanford.edu, 2021) <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/democracy/#DemoDefi> accessed 11 February 2022.
15. ibid 11
16. Rikki Dean, Jean-Paul Gagnon and Hans Asenbaum, ‘What Is Democratic Theory?’ (2019) 6 Democratic Theory <https://www.berghahnjournals.com/view/journals/democratic-theory/6/2/dt060201.xml> accessed 28 February 2022. 
17. David Held ed., Political Theory Today 1991.
18. ibid 3 
19. Janna Anderson and Lee Raine, ‘Concerns about Democracy in the Digital Age’ (Pew Research Center, 2020) <https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/21/concerns-about-democracy-in-the-digital-age/ > accessed 28 February 2022. 
20. Robert Epstein and Ronald E Robertson, ‘The Search Engine Manipulations Effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of election’ (American INstitute for Behavioral Research and Technology, 2015) <https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1419828112> accessed 28 February 2022. 
21. Carole Jean Uhlaner, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Elsevier, 2020) <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080970868930861> accessed 28 February 2022. 
22. Juliana Machado Silva ‘The Political Micro-Targeting Threats to Democracy: Building legal Solutions to Preserve Fair Elections’ (Vrije Universiteit, 2020) <https://www.staatsrechtkring.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Scriptie-Juliana-Augustinis-The-Political-Micro-Targeting-Threats-to-Democracy.pdf> accessed 28 Februaury 2022.
23.  ‘Focus AP 2020-2023: Dataprotectie In Een Digitale Samenleving’ (Autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl, 2020) <https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/sites/default/files/atoms/files/focus_ap_202-2023_groot.pdf> accessed 28 February 2022.