Digital redlining

Although digital redlining refers to a complex and varied set of practices, it has been most commonly applied to practices with a geographical dimension. Common examples include when an internet service providers decide to not service specific geographic areas because those areas are seen to be not as profitable, resulting in discrimination against low-income communities, with resulting impacts on access to crucial services and civic participation.[9][17] AT&T has faced specific scrutiny for this form of digital redlining, it has been reported that AT&T has been classist in its offerings of broadband internet service in areas that are more impoverished. [18]

Geographically based digital redlining can also apply to digital content or the distribution of goods sold online. Geographically based games such as Pokémon Go have been shown to offer more virtual stops and rewards in geographic areas that are less ethnically and racially diverse. [19] In 2016, Amazon was rebuked for not offering their Prime same-day delivery service to many communities that were largely African American and had incomes that were beneath the national average.[20][21] Even services such as email can be impacted, with many email administrators creating filters for flagging particular email messages as spam based on the geographical origin of the message.[22]

Although often aligned with discrimination that falls into a geographically based context; not all digital redlining is geographically based. Digital redlining also refers to when vulnerable populations are targeted for or excluded from specific content or access to the internet in a way that harms them. Trade schools and community colleges, which typically have a more working class student body, have been found to block public internet content from their students where elite research institutions do not.[23] The use of big data and analytics allow for a much more nuanced form of discrimination that can target specific vulnerable populations.[24] For example, Facebook has been criticized for providing tools that allow advertisers to target ads by ethnic affinity and gender, effectively blocking minorities from seeing specific ads for housing and employment.[25][26][27] In October 2019, a major class action lawsuit was filed against Facebook alleging gender and age discrimination in financial advertising.[28][29] A broad array of consumers can be particularly vulnerable to digital redlining when it is used outside of a geographical context. Besides targeting vulnerable populations based on traditional and legally recognized classifications such as race, gender, age, etc., it has been shown that personal data mined and then resold by brokers can be used to target those who have been identified as suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia, or simply identified as impulse buyers or gullible.[30][31]

Earlier distinctions have been made between weblining—the process of charging customers different prices based on profile information --- and internet or digital redlining, with digital redlining being focused not on pricing but access.[7] As early as 2002 the Gale Encyclopedia of E-Commerce puts forth the distinction more in use today: weblining is the pervasive and generally accepted (or at least tolerated) practice of personalizing access to products and services in ways invisible to the user; digital redlining is when such personalized, data-driven schemes perpetuate traditional advantages of privileged demographics.[32] As weblining has become more ubiquitous, the term has fallen out of use in favor of the more general term personalization.

Scholars have often drawn connections between the digital divide and digital redlining.[33] In practice, the digital divide is seen as one of a number of impacts of digital redlining, and digital redlining is one of a number of ways in which the divide is maintained or extended.[23][34]