Author: Danaë Metaxa (University of Pennsylvania) 

This white paper examines the digital advertising ecosystem, with a particular focus on social inequality. It begins in Section 1 by introducing the concept of a sociotechnical system and the challenges of studying such systems empirically: these systems are dynamic, their data are ephemeral, they are embedded deeply in people’s everyday lives, and they are highly personalized. Next, Section 2 introduces the reader to digital advertising, beginning with a brief history of advertising before the digital era and continuing to explain the technical infrastructure that underlies this ecosystem. Section 3 then delves into bias and discrimination in digital ads on both a theoretical level (legal context and types of bias) and a summarization of work that has empirically studied discrimination in digital ads. Finally, Section 4 concludes by discussing why these issues persist and how we might change them—from better research to law and policy.

Author: Charlton McIlwain (New York University) 

The algorithmic systems and platforms that facilitate race-based targeted advertising and mark are the focal point of increased scrutiny by civil rights activists, advocacy organizations, policymakers, technologists, and others. Consensus is growing that these automated, algorithmic systems discriminate against and produce tangible harms that disproportionately impact communities and people of color. However, we collectively know less about the demonstrable ways that racial discrimination takes place in our contemporary digital advertising ecosystem. Further, we have fewer ways to think about how to conceptualize and document the potential impacts and harms of race-based advertising in both legacy media forms and especially in today’s digital media landscape, which is driven by search engines, digital advertising and marketing platforms, and a complex infrastructure of advertising and data technologies that create the systems and structures defining the business of advertising and marketing today.

This report and the research that produced it aims to accomplish the following:

1. Illuminate how marketers and advertisers target individuals and communities based on race in today’s digital advertising systems.

2. Identify policy challenges and interventions to help mitigate the impact of algorithmic discrimination in advertising and marketing practice.

3. Provide an alternative way of conceptualizing, measuring, and documenting the potential impacts and/or harms produced by race-based target marketing and advertising structured by digital marketing and advertising platforms.

4. Help the research and policy community think about what types of data can be marshaled to better understand the ways that racial targeting works in today’s digital advertising landscape and to help formulate methods for utilizing data to shape our understanding about how this industry practice produces discriminatory impacts and harms.

5. Provide grounding for all of the above in the systemic, structural, and historical context at the intersection of critical race theory, technological development, and advertising practice.

For decades, our government’s policies excluded many by design. But throughout our nation’s history, we have joined across races and places to solve big problems and build democracy to serve generations to come. 

A critical part of this generation’s work is to build new infrastructure –– accessible transportation, clean energy, climate-resilient cities and towns, broadband access, good jobs –– that serve all of our communities. To guide government leaders at all levels in this undertaking, PolicyLink and partners developed a set of Infrastructure Standards, precipitated by the unprecedented influx of government funds with the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Most of the funds distributed through the IIJA and IRA will use the established mechanisms for dispersing government funds –– from block grants to formula funding –– which entrenched many inequities over decades. However, still, federal, state, local, and tribal government officials have considerable ability to act in support of equity, and we urge them to adhere to these standards as they administer these funds. 

Together, we can implement new standards for governing so that nothing stands in the way of everyone providing a great life for their families.  

Download the following related brief:  Building for the All! A Guide for Local, State, and Tribal Governments in the Infrastructure Moment

This PolicyLink and Race Forward report provides an overview of the federal equity action planning process and assess the strengths and areas for improvement in the plans themselves. The assessment identifies three overarching themes as a result of the analysis: 1) Responsiveness to Executive Order, 2) Transformative Measures, and 3) Sustainability and concludes by offering recommendations for how an equity action plan process may be strengthened if there is an opportunity to do so.

A comment guide providing a brief history of the AFFH mandate, an overview of the 2023 proposed AFFH rule and the federal rulemaking and public comment process, a step-by-step guide to help you or your organization to write and submit a strong, equity-focused comment,  data sources to support it, and sample language for organizations across sectors to use in their public comment.

ABOUT THE EQUITY SCORING INITIATIVE
A partnership of PolicyLink and the Urban Institute

Federal legislation is fundamental to building a nation in which all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential. Since our nation’s founding, in many ways, federal legislation has created and exacerbated racial inequities, leaving one-third of the population experiencing material poverty and preventing our democracy from realizing the promise of equity.

To ensure the federal government serves us all, we must accurately understand and assess whether every policy advances or impedes equity.

The Equity Scoring Initiative (ESI) exists to establish the foundation for a new legislative scoring regime. By scoring for equity, we can begin to create an accountable, responsive democracy.