A report on digital rights and viewers’ well-being has questioned why Facebook requires more scrutiny on gambling-harm adverts and campaigns than those promoting gambling brands on the social media platform.
The observation has been made by the Open Rights Group (ORG), a UK-based non-profit organisation that campaigns for digital rights and the protection of privacy by ending unfair and unlawful data sharing practices.
Titled: “Profiling by Proxy: How Meta’s Data-Driven Ads Fuel Discrimination” – the ORG’s report questions why “Meta requires more transparency about adverts that highlight the harms of gambling than about adverts that promote gambling.”
At present, gambling harm adverts are categorised as ‘political advocacy’ content, subject to “extra transparency requirements” for public disclosure.
In contrast, commercial gambling ads, even those for products like “social casino” games, face fewer transparency requirements, especially if they’re not classified under restricted categories.
As such, Meta advertising policies have created a paradox where it’s more difficult to advertise campaigns raising awareness of gambling harms than those promoting gambling products on Meta’s platforms of Facebook and Instagram.
“Taking out an ad to push for political action on problem gambling has more conditions and restrictions attached than gambling ads,” the report notes. While political content is tightly regulated and publicly logged, standard gambling promotions often escape the same level of oversight. In practice, this means that those warning about the risks of gambling face more hurdles than those pushing gambling products.
At-Risk Groups in the Firing Line
ORG identifies groups most at risk from data-driven advertising, especially on Facebook and Instagram. These include individuals struggling with gambling addiction, young people, and those with financial vulnerabilities or mental health conditions.
The report documents how data from gambling websites is fed back to Meta using tracking tools like Meta Pixel, which enables platforms to flood users’ feeds with gambling-related content — often without proper user consent.
“The adverts were not just from the sites that had shared data unlawfully, but a whole range of others as well,” the report highlights, suggesting a systemic failure to control data misuse.
Worse still, gambling harms are compounded by data profiling, where “thousands of data points” are collected from user activity to build digital profiles. These profiles can infer deeply personal traits — including addictive behaviours — and serve targeted ads accordingly.
The report also raises the alarm over children and teens being exposed to harmful content. Despite Meta’s restrictions on targeting under-18s, ORG highlights repeated failures.
In a 2024 experiment by the Tech Transparency Project, researchers were able to get ads promoting weight loss, alcohol, and gambling approved for audiences aged 13 to 17, using Meta’s own generative AI tools.
“Despite policy restrictions, social media platforms make enormous amounts of money from the revenue they generate selling advertising space which is seen by young people,” the report adds.
AI worsens the problem
Meta’s rollout of generative AI into its ad tools poses new threats. The report warns: “With the introduction of Generative AI to Meta’s ad tools it is likely that existing problems with opacity and lack of accountability will worsen, and discriminatory targeting could increase.”
AI systems learn from historical engagement, and thus may replicate or even exacerbate biases — including the profiling of users with gambling interests or mental health concerns.
“Fairness and equality of access are not the primary considerations,” the report states bluntly, arguing that profit remains the platform’s core priority.
Political Intervention
The ORG’s report calls for a major rethink in how digital advertising and viewer consent is applied across social media platforms such as those owned by Meta.
Ad profiling, they contend, should be opt-in, not forced by default. Platforms must also provide clear and universal transparency for all advertising, not just political or advocacy content.
DCMS has also faced mounting calls to investigate the opaque advertising algorithms and data tracking practices used by operators, following a landmark High Court case.
In that ruling, a former problem gambler successfully challenged Sky Bet for targeting him with gambling adverts without obtaining valid consent. Sky Bet had allegedly used cookies to build a detailed behavioural profile via third-party data, allowing them to deliver highly personalised — and potentially harmful — adverts.
The urgency for reform is reflected in regulatory changes. From 1 May 2025, the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has mandated that online gambling operators must offer users the ability to opt-in to specific product types and the communication channels through which they wish to receive marketing. Crucially, operators must also ensure users do not receive gambling offers they have not explicitly consented to.
While the UKGC’s update is focused on gambling operators, campaigners argue that the same standards must now be applied to digital giants like Meta that have avoided accountability thus far.
