ATI | NetLab UFRJ

Advertising Transparency Index

The Social Media Platform Advertising Transparency Index (ITP) is a tool for assessing the mechanisms for accessing data on boosted publications and monetized content on the main social media platforms operating in Brazil.

Launched in November 2024, the ITP is based on a structured, systematized and reproducible roadmap, based on data quality parameters and dimensions, to measure the availability, transparency and quality of advertising data provided by the platforms.

The Index is a proposal by NetLab UFRJ to promote data transparency in Brazil, given the scarcity of qualified information on the placement of ads on social media platforms.

The full Index can be accessed below.

Platform Advertising Transparency Index

81 to 100 points

Ideal transparency

61 to 80 points

Regular transparency

41 to 60 points

Precarious transparency

21 to 40 points

Irrelevant or null transparency

0 to 20 points

Satisfactory transparency

Platform Score Ranges and Rankings

Platforms Notes

Meta is the most transparent company in advertising on social media platforms in Brazil.

The company scored 49.8 points in the ITP evaluation, but its transparency is still average. Meta's good policy of offering a free API and interface for accessing advertising data is compromised because some of this data is only delivered in the case of political, electoral or socially relevant content. Therefore, it loses half of its points in 5 of the 6 special criteria, which represents 25% of the total ITP value.

Meta also loses points for delivering data with inadequate granularity for audience segmentation analysis and ad pricing strategies.

Another problem with the company's advertising transparency concerns the lack of transparency reports on the moderation of ads displayed on its platforms, which impacts the compliance dimension.

Advertising transparency: Regular

Advertising transparency: Precarious

With a score of 18.3, LinkedIn's advertising data transparency is irrelevant. Despite offering two ways to access the ad repository, the platform's API and interface features are very limited.

In its interface, it is possible to access the content of the ads and information about the advertiser page and the entity responsible for payment. Data on engagement, impressions, investment, broadcasting period, and demographic and geographic targeting are not public for ads circulating in Brazil.

In addition, the repository interface does not allow the download of ad data.

Although this can be retrieved through the API, the same deficiencies already reported in the interface persist.

Another problem with LinkedIn is the fact that the platform does not disclose information about the moderation of irregular advertising.

Advertising transparency: Irrelevant

Google scored 8.2 points in the ITP. Its ad transparency, considered irrelevant, is largely compromised because its repository's API only retrieves data on political and electoral ads broadcast up until the end of April 2024, since these have theoretically been banned on its platforms since May 1.

These ads can also be viewed in its repository's interface, along with ads driven by verified advertisers in the last 365 days, which represents an insufficient and non-representative sample of ad data.

Furthermore, its interface's features are very limited. There is no way to search for ads by keywords; it is only possible to find them through the names with which advertisers registered on the company's network.

By providing only non-representative and outdated data on ads circulating on its platforms, Google scores only on technical parameters about its API.

Advertising transparency: Irrelevant

Google

X/Twitter is one of the four platforms analyzed that did not score in the ITP, and its advertising data transparency is zero.

In addition to not providing an API or ad repository interface for collecting and analyzing advertising data in Brazil, X/Twitter does not publish transparency reports on the removal of illegal, irregular and/or abusive ads and advertisers.

The company also applies discriminatory policies, offering an API and repository interface only for accessing ads that circulated in member countries of the European Union, due to the obligations established by the Digital Services Act (DSA).

Advertising transparency: Null

X / Twitter

TikTok's advertising data transparency is null because the platform does not score in any of the evaluation parameters proposed in the ITP, since it does not provide a repository interface or API for collecting data from ads that were displayed to Brazilian users.

For ads displayed in the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland, TikTok provides an API and interface for accessing data from all ads promoted in these countries after October 1, 2022 and viewed at least once.

As for the quality of data in transparency reports, TikTok does not meet the minimum expected in any of the ITP parameters, since it only reports the total number of ads removed globally, without specifying where they were displayed and the reason for moderation.

Advertising transparency: Null

TikTok

Kwai scores no points on any dimension and its advertising data transparency is zero. The platform does not provide an API or interface for accessing and collecting ads in Brazil or anywhere else in the world.

In April 2024, the company launched the Political and Electoral Ads Library in Brazil, where it was possible to view a few pieces related to the 2022 general elections. However, in less than a month, Kwai backtracked, announced a ban on political ads and stopped feeding the repository.

During the period in which it was active, the library did not allow the use of keywords in the search for ads, limiting the search to the name with which advertisers registered on the platform.

Advertising transparency: Null

Kwai

Pinterest’s advertising data transparency is considered null and void because the platform does not offer any ad transparency solution in Brazil.

The platform only allows you to view ads that have circulated in European Union countries through a repository interface. Even in these countries, Pinterest does not offer a way to access the repository through an API.

In addition, Pinterest does not detail the measures applied specifically to ads in its transparency reports. According to the platform itself, “ad policies are applied differently than organic content and are not included in this transparency report.”