The DOI matches its DataCite record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Facebook Use of Sensitive Data for Advertising in Europe
Open accessAbstract
The upcoming European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) prohibits the processing and exploitation of some categories of personal data (health, political orientation, sexual preferences, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, etc.) due to the obvious privacy risks that may be derived from a malicious use of such type of information. These categories are referred to as sensitive personal data. Facebook has been recently fined EUR 1.2M in Spain for collecting, storing and processing sensitive personal data for advertising purposes. This paper quantifies the portion of Facebook users in the European Union (EU) who are labeled with interests linked to sensitive personal data. The results of our study reveal that Facebook labels 73% EU users with sensitive interests. This corresponds to 40% of the overall EU population. We also estimate that a malicious third-party could unveil the identity of Facebook users that have been assigned a sensitive interest at a cost as low as EUR 0.015 per user. Finally, we propose and implement a web browser extension to inform Facebook users of the sensitive interests Facebook has assigned them.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Spanish researchers showed that “Facebook labels 73% of EU users with sensitive interests”, such as “Islam”, “reproductive health”, and “homosexuality”.”
From Discrimination, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic decision-making (2025) · cites this paper as Cabañas, Cuevas and Cuevas 2018
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Glove: Global Vectors for Word Representation
Pennington, J., Socher, R., & Manning, C. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1162 · Cited by 34,071
Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space
Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1301.3781 · Cited by 26,568
Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionality
Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1310.4546 · Cited by 24,533
An introduction to ROC analysis
Fawcett, T. (2006) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010 · Cited by 21,879
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031619 · Cited by 8,733
Linguistic Regularities in Continuous Space Word Representations
Mikolov, T., Yih, W.-T., & Zweig, G. (2013) · Cited by 2,913
Investigating Ad Transparency Mechanisms in Social Media: A Case Study of Facebook's Explanations
Andreou, A., Venkatadri, G., Goga, O., Gummadi, K. P., Loiseau, P., & Mislove, A. E. (2018) · Network and Distributed System Security Symposium · doi:10.14722/ndss.2018.23191 · Cited by 1,505
Emmers, E. (2019) · SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts · doi:10.5593/sgemsocial2019v/1.1 · Cited by 1,317
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Discrimination, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic decision-making
Borgesius, F. Z. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.13465 · Cited by 152
Analyzing gender inequality through large-scale Facebook advertising data
García, D., Kassa, Y. M., Cuevas, √., Cebrián, M., Moro, E., Rahwan, I., & Cuevas, R. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1717781115 · Cited by 84
Self-citationCalvo, P. (2019) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-019-09523-0 · Cited by 71
Beauvisage, T., Beuscart, J.-S., Coavoux, S., & Mellet, K. (2024) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448221146174 · Cited by 37
Facebook Ads as a Demographic Tool to Measure the Urban-Rural Divide
Rama, D., Mejova, Y., Tizzoni, M., Kalimeri, K., & Weber, I. G. (2020) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3366423.3380118 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Cabañas, J. G., Cuevas, Á., & Cuevas, R.
- ORCID
- Cuevas, Rubén
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1802.05030
- OpenAlex
- W2785401534
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Keywords
- sensitive personal data, Facebook, General Data Protection Regulation, targeted advertising, user profiling, privacy, browser extension
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review