» Articles » PMID: 31732327

Vaccine-related Advertising in the Facebook Ad Archive

Overview
Journal Vaccine
Date 2019 Nov 17
PMID 31732327
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In 2018, Facebook introduced Ad Archive as a platform to improve transparency in advertisements related to politics and "issues of national importance." Vaccine-related Facebook advertising is publicly available for the first time. After measles outbreaks in the US brought renewed attention to the possible role of Facebook advertising in the spread of vaccine-related misinformation, Facebook announced steps to limit vaccine-related misinformation. This study serves as a baseline of advertising before new policies went into effect.

Methods: Using the keyword 'vaccine', we searched Ad Archive on December 13, 2018 and again on February 22, 2019. We exported data for 505 advertisements. A team of annotators sorted advertisements by content: pro-vaccine, anti-vaccine, not relevant. We also conducted a thematic analysis of major advertising themes. We ran Mann-Whitney U tests to compare ad performance metrics.

Results: 309 advertisements were included in analysis with 163 (53%) pro-vaccine advertisements and 145 (47%) anti-vaccine advertisements. Despite a similar number of advertisements, the median number of ads per buyer was significantly higher for anti-vaccine ads. First time buyers are less likely to complete disclosure information and risk ad removal. Thematically, anti-vaccine advertising messages are relatively uniform and emphasize vaccine harms (55%). In contrast, pro-vaccine advertisements come from a diverse set of buyers (83 unique) with varied goals including promoting vaccination (49%), vaccine related philanthropy (15%), and vaccine related policy (14%).

Conclusions: A small set of anti-vaccine advertisement buyers have leveraged Facebook advertisements to reach targeted audiences. By deeming all vaccine-related content an issue of "national importance," Facebook has further the politicized vaccines. The implementation of a blanket disclosure policy also limits which ads can successfully run on Facebook. Improving transparency and limiting misinformation should not be separate goals. Public health communication efforts should consider the potential impact on Facebook users' vaccine attitudes and behaviors.

Citing Articles

Dynamics of communication on measles vaccination on digital platforms in the Brazilian context: challenges and perspectives.

Silva M, Gattas V, Luna E Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2024; 66:e68.

PMID: 39699424 PMC: 11654139. DOI: 10.1590/S1678-9946202466068.


Source credibility: a necessary North Star in cancer care.

OReilly S, Dennehy K, Collins D BJC Rep. 2024; 2(1):56.

PMID: 39516644 PMC: 11523956. DOI: 10.1038/s44276-024-00075-5.


Public agreement with misinformation about wind farms.

Winter K, Hornsey M, Pummerer L, Sassenberg K Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):8888.

PMID: 39406698 PMC: 11480317. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-53278-2.


Misinformation surrounding sodium reduction for blood pressure: content analysis of Japanese posts on X.

Terada M, Okuhara T, Nishiie Y, Kiuchi T, Murakami K Health Promot Int. 2024; 39(3).

PMID: 38934479 PMC: 11208930. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daae073.


Mapping automatic social media information disorder. The role of bots and AI in spreading misleading information in society.

Tomassi A, Falegnami A, Romano E PLoS One. 2024; 19(5):e0303183.

PMID: 38820281 PMC: 11142451. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303183.


References
1.
Vanderslott S . Exploring the meaning of pro-vaccine activism across two countries. Soc Sci Med. 2019; 222:59-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.12.033. View

2.
Richardson A, Ganz O, Vallone D . Tobacco on the web: surveillance and characterisation of online tobacco and e-cigarette advertising. Tob Control. 2014; 24(4):341-7. DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051246. View

3.
Grier S, Kumanyika S . Targeted marketing and public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010; 31:349-69. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103607. View

4.
Schmidt A, Zollo F, Scala A, Betsch C, Quattrociocchi W . Polarization of the vaccination debate on Facebook. Vaccine. 2018; 36(25):3606-3612. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.05.040. View

5.
Kata A . A postmodern Pandora's box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet. Vaccine. 2010; 28(7):1709-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022. View