DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING PRACTICES IN THE DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT

Abstract

Introduction. Digital advertising has become the dominant media channel of our time, accounting for the majority of global advertising expenditure and characterised by global reach, process automation, and a high level of competition. The migration of the advertising industry to the online environment has altered the very nature of the relationship between advertiser and consumer: whereas in the traditional setting, deceptive advertising was largely confined to false claims about a product, in the digital environment, it acquires a systemic, architectural character. Deception now resides not only in the content of the message but also in the design of the interface, the sequence of steps, the manner in which prices are presented, the mechanisms for subscription enrolment, and so forth. The adoption of automated advertising procurement (programmatic advertising) and generative artificial intelligence has enhanced the effectiveness of targeting, yet it has simultaneously widened the scope for deceptive practices – from manipulative interface design and deceptive gamification to advertising fraud and deepfake advertising. There thus arises a clear need to determine the essence, typology, and regulatory boundaries of deceptive advertising practices in the digital environment from the economic, technological, and regulatory perspectives.

Purpose. The purpose of the study is to elucidate the economic and legal foundations of deceptive advertising practices in the digital environment to systematise a multi-level typology of such practices and to identify them according to the level at which deception is effected, which makes it possible to differentiate regulatory approaches across individual jurisdictions and to formulate recommendations for regulators, businesses, and users.

Materials and methods. The materials of the study comprise: 1) the legal and regulatory framework governing deceptive advertising practices in the digital environment (in particular, the acts of the European Union, the United States, and Ukraine); 2) official materials of regulatory authorities and analytical data on the scale and prevalence of deceptive practices; 3) the works of domestic and foreign scholars in the field of the economics of digital markets, the protection of economic competition, and consumer protection.

In the course of the study, the following scientific methods were employed: theoretical generalisation and grouping (to construct a typology of deceptive practices and a taxonomy of dark patterns, as well as to distinguish deceptive gamification as a separate phenomenon); the comparative-legal method (to juxtapose the regulatory regimes of the EU, the United States, and Ukraine); the systemic-structural method and the case-study method (to analyse regulatory cases); formalisation, analysis, and synthesis (to establish the connections between the economic, technological, and legal dimensions of the phenomenon); and logical generalisation of the results (to formulate conclusions).

Results. The article elucidates the economic and legal nature and structure of deceptive advertising practices in the digital environment and proposes a multi-level typology thereof, constructed according to the criterion of the level at which deception is effected – namely, the levels of the message, the interface, the market ecosystem, and synthetic content. The taxonomy of manipulative patterns is systematised by principal families; in addition, the study substantiates the case for distinguishing deceptive gamification as a separate object of inquiry, one that integrates the features of several families of manipulative design and engenders heightened risks for vulnerable categories of consumers, primarily minors. The place of deceptive practices within the system of economic relations among participants in the advertising market is determined, and the nature of the harm inflicted upon consumers, advertisers, and digital platforms is characterised. The thesis of the systemic, rather than episodic, character of the phenomenon under study is substantiated; a convergence of the regulatory approaches of the three jurisdictions is established, which, notwithstanding differences in institutional mechanisms, is subordinated to a common objective: safeguarding the autonomy of consumer choice.

Prospects. Further research is proposed to focus on examining the resilience of autonomous artificial-intelligence systems to the influence of dark patterns, on estimating the indirect costs borne by bona fide market participants in countering deceptive practices, and on an in-depth analysis of the harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with that of the EU regarding the regulation of dark patterns and deceptive gamification, which are not yet directly governed by national law. This will make it possible to improve the legal and regulatory framework and enforcement practice in the sphere of consumer protection in the digital environment.