Tag: Ad delivery

Categories
Uncategorized

new conference paper: Auditing for Racial Discrimination in the Delivery of Education Ads

Our new paper “Auditing for Racial Discrimination in the Delivery of Education Ads” will appear at the ACM FAccT Conference in Rio de Janeiro in June 2024.

From the abstract:

Experiments showing educational ads for for-profit schools are disproportionately shown to Blacks at statistically significant levels. (from [Imana24a], figure 4).
Experiments showing educational ads for for-profit schools are disproportionately shown to Blacks at statistically significant levels. (from [Imana24a], figure 4).

Digital ads on social-media platforms play an important role in shaping access to economic opportunities. Our work proposes and implements a new third-party auditing method that can evaluate racial bias in the delivery of ads for education opportunities. Third-party auditing is important because it allows external parties to demonstrate presence or absence of bias in social-media algorithms. Education is a domain with legal protections against discrimination and concerns of racial-targeting, but bias induced by ad delivery algorithms has not been previously explored in this domain. Prior audits demonstrated discrimination in platforms’ delivery of ads to users for housing and employment ads. These audit findings supported legal action that prompted Meta to change their ad-delivery algorithms to reduce bias, but only in the domains of housing, employment, and credit. In this work, we propose a new methodology that allows us to measure racial discrimination in a platform’s ad delivery algorithms for education ads. We apply our method to Meta using ads for real schools and observe the results of delivery. We find evidence of racial discrimination in Meta’s algorithmic delivery of ads for education opportunities, posing legal and ethical concerns. Our results extend evidence of algorithmic discrimination to the education domain, showing that current bias mitigation mechanisms are narrow in scope, and suggesting a broader role for third-party auditing of social media in areas where ensuring non-discrimination is important.

This work was reported on in an article by Sam Biddle in the Intercept, by Thomas Claburn at The Register, and in ACM Tech News.

This paper is a joint work of Basileal Imana and Aleksandra Korolova from Princeton University, and John Heidemann from USC/ISI. We thank the NSF for supporting this work (CNS-1956435, CNS-
1916153, CNS-2333448, CNS-1943584, CNS-2344925, CNS-2319409,
and CNS-1925737).

Data from this paper is available from our website.

Categories
Papers Publications

New conference paper: Having your Privacy Cake and Eating it Too: Platform-supported Auditing of Social Media Algorithms for Public Interest

Our new paper “Having your Privacy Cake and Eating it Too: Platform-supported Auditing of Social Media Algorithms for Public Interest” will appear at The 26th ACM Conference On Computer-Supported Cooperative Work And Social Computing (CSCW 2023).

From the abstract:

Overview of our proposed platform-supported framework for auditing relevance estimators while protecting the privacy of audit participants and the business interests of platforms.

Concerns of potential harmful outcomes have prompted proposal of legislation in both the U.S. and the E.U. to mandate a new form of auditing where vetted external researchers get privileged access to social media platforms. Unfortunately, to date there have been no concrete technical proposals to provide such auditing, because auditing at scale risks disclosure of users’ private data and platforms’ proprietary algorithms. We propose a new method for platform-supported auditing that can meet the goals of the proposed legislation. The first contribution of our work is to enumerate the challenges and the limitations of existing auditing methods to implement these policies at scale. Second, we suggest that limited, privileged access to relevance estimators is the key to enabling generalizable platform-supported auditing of social media platforms by external researchers. Third, we show platform-supported auditing need not risk user privacy nor disclosure of platforms’ business interests by proposing an auditing framework that protects against these risks. For a particular fairness metric, we show that ensuring privacy imposes only a small constant factor increase (6.34x as an upper bound, and 4x for typical parameters) in the number of samples required for accurate auditing. Our technical contributions, combined with ongoing legal and policy efforts, can enable public oversight into how social media platforms affect individuals and society by moving past the privacy-vs-transparency hurdle.

A 2-minute video overview of the work can be found here.

This paper is a joint work of Basileal Imana from USC, Aleksandra Korolova from Princeton University, and John Heidemann from USC/ISI.

Categories
Data Papers Publications

New paper “Auditing for Discrimination in Algorithms Delivering Job Ads” at TheWebConf 2021

We published a new paper “Auditing for Discrimination in Algorithms Delivering Job Ads” by Basileal Imana (University of Southern California), Aleksandra Korolova (University of Southern California) and John Heidemann (University of Southern California/ISI) at TheWebConf 2021 (WWW ’21).

From the abstract:

Skew in the delivery of real-world ads on Facebook (FB) but not LinkedIn (LI).
Comparison of ad delivery using “Reach” (R) and “Conversion” (C) campaign objectives on Facebook. There is skew for both cases but less skew for “Reach”.

Ad platforms such as Facebook, Google and LinkedIn promise value for advertisers through their targeted advertising. However, multiple studies have shown that ad delivery on such platforms can be skewed by gender or race due to hidden algorithmic optimization by the platforms, even when not requested by the advertisers. Building on prior work measuring skew in ad delivery, we develop a new methodology for black-box auditing of algorithms for discrimination in the delivery of job advertisements. Our first contribution is to identify the distinction between skew in ad delivery due to protected categories such as gender or race, from skew due to differences in qualification among people in the targeted audience. This distinction is important in U.S. law, where ads may be targeted based on qualifications, but not on protected categories. Second, we develop an auditing methodology that distinguishes between skew explainable by differences in qualifications from other factors, such as the ad platform’s optimization for engagement or training its algorithms on biased data. Our method controls for job qualification by comparing ad delivery of two concurrent ads for similar jobs, but for a pair of companies with different de facto gender distributions of employees. We describe the careful statistical tests that establish evidence of non-qualification skew in the results. Third, we apply our proposed methodology to two prominent targeted advertising platforms for job ads: Facebook and LinkedIn. We confirm skew by gender in ad delivery on Facebook, and show that it cannot be justified by differences in qualifications. We fail to find skew in ad delivery on LinkedIn. Finally, we suggest improvements to ad platform practices that could make external auditing of their algorithms in the public interest more feasible and accurate.

This paper was awarded runner-up for best student paper at The Web Conference 2021.

The data from this paper is upon request, please see our dataset page.

This work was reported in the popular press: The Intercept, MIT Technology Review, Wall Street Journal, The Register, VentureBeat, Reuters, The Verge, Engadget, Associated Press.