Meta bans ads for Virginia Woolf play in Spain

jmclnx

Why meta is not fully banned in the EU is beyond me :) I know banning or forcing meta to obey laws in the US is impossible due to bribes (political contributions), but in the EU I would think meta could at the very least be reined in.

colingauvin

We don't have to put up with this. We simply choose to. But our laws could be whatever we want them to be.

martythemaniak

Sounds like malicious compliance, they should get a fine for that as well.

Illniyar

Probably got better publicity with this ban then if they actually showed the ads. My money is that this is manufactured by some PR team. Possibly the Ad's text was purposely inflammatory (something like "overthrow the patriarchy" or something) so that they can say it was banned.

pogopop77

Well now we know Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Meta, apparently.

petcat

Appears to be a response to EU regulation in 2025 banning political/electoral advertising [1]: > Ending Political, Electoral and Social Issue Advertising in the EU in Response to Incoming European Regulation I guess rather than micro-regulate what constitutes "designed to influence an election/referendum, voting behavior, or a legislative/regulatory process", they just decided to refuse to run ads for anything potentially politically or socially "sensitive". I'm guessing that they also refuse to run ads for things that are less socially acceptable such as anti-feminism which I would say is a good thing. [1] https://about.fb.com/news/2025/07/ending-political-electoral...

aworks

Is this an EU or Spain issue? I regularly attend at a theatre in Chicago that has socially "sensitive" plays. I often see their ads on Facebook.

sxp

This is a shitty article. It doesn’t mention that the ban on social ads in the EU is due to their anti-free speech rules rather than a Meta specific policy. Meta is in favor of social activism ads in general but restricts them in the EU: https://about.fb.com/news/2025/07/ending-political-electoral...

mediaman

The article doesn't mention this, of course, but Meta prohibits "socially sensitive" advertising due to the EU's TTPA law, or "Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising." It imposes substantial bureaucratic compliance burden on advertising platforms to accept ads that deal with political issues. Meta decided that the revenue wasn't worth the compliance burden, so they do not accept any political advertising at all. They filter anything that smells like political or social issues, whether it be a campaign about anti-immigration or a play about feminism, because if they accept it they will get heavily fined by the EU. This is why Meta does not ban this advertising outside of the EU. It's a EU regulatory problem. The Register does not mention this anywhere in the article.

latexr

> To resolve the situation, Meta recommended removing “key words” so that the text doesn’t appear to encourage activism. Move along now, don’t make a racket, don’t do anything to disturb count Zuckerberg and his masters. Go away with your progressive ideas like… Allowing women to express themselves.

tescreal

Why do people still bother with meta and others? In my community (outside USA), we use local websites and posted bills. There's no magic to it. >Network effects If people decide the cost/effort is too high, that will dissipate. >"Somebody else will" This amounts to a thought-terminating cliche at this point. You are responsible for your own choices, not what others do. It's the worst cop out, you are claiming no agency. *royal "you" where applicable. I find a lot of responses to these stories fiendish. It is not "privileged" to refuse a bad deal. If anything, it is "privileged" to say one has no choice. Sorry if this comes off as rantish... I find a lot of the conversation around big conglomerates tedious and usually just laden with overtly bad-faith arguments and lazy defeatism. Conversely, love or hate Woolf, surely there is enough respect for simple arts people should find these behaviors abhorrent.

tantalor

> As a theatre we have to publicise our activities … and we have to make use of social media so that people are aware of cultural activities Does the theater have a right to advertise? Is FB obligated to carry their ads? Can FB unilaterally reject their ads, even without giving a reason? It seems only fair they control what happens inside their walled garden. But they are effectively holding their user population as hostages. Don't like the decision? You can fuck off.

welwala

Meta has a complicated history with Barcelona. They had a huge moderation centre in the city operated by a company called Telus, which incidentally happened to be located in the iconic Glories tower - formerly Torre Agbar - which is shaped like a huge vibrator. I always thought it was ironic that Meta towered over the city's skyline like a huge dick. In fairness they had no hand in its construction (it was made by the water company) and they only rented some of its floors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torre_Gl%C3%B2ries But one day to the next they fired all the more than 2000 moderators in search of cheaper pastures like Colombia. They are now being sued for allegedly trying to avoid unionisation and a lawsuit of psychological harm by the moderators: https://www.thelocal.es/20260916/meta-faces-lawsuit-in-spain... So Barcelona does not love Meta (anymore). I doubt this factors into this but it is a pretty sad coincidence.