Beyond Distributive Justice: Hermeneutical Fairness in Ad Delivery

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.03419v1
• Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 06:51:40 GMT
• Title: Beyond Distributive Justice: Hermeneutical Fairness in Ad Delivery
• Abstract summary: We argue that online advertising can still produce harms arising from ads' content and from how recipients interpret and uptake them.<n>We model ad delivery as a mechanism that distributes interpretative resources and can fail in two ways.<n>We integrate them into a benchmark, utility-driven ad allocation framework that already enforces distributive justice.
• Score: 7.857920011652655
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Fairness in online advertising is often formalized as a distributive justice problem, aiming to ensure that impressions, opportunities, or outcomes are allocated comparably across protected groups. Yet online advertising can still produce harms arising from ads' content and from how recipients interpret and uptake them. To capture this dimension, we draw on Miranda Fricker's notion of hermeneutical injustice. We model ad delivery as a mechanism that distributes interpretative resources and can fail in two ways: relevant concepts can be withheld through systematic under-exposure, leading to hermeneutical deprivation; and recipients may experience hermeneutical distortions when saturated with low-uptake or skewed framings. Grounded in exploratory correlational patterns from the AIDS Advertising Evaluation surveys (1986-1987), we introduce a group-level hermeneutical fairness constraint and a hermeneutically aware utility cost. We integrate them into a benchmark, utility-driven ad allocation framework that already enforces distributive justice, yielding a distributively fair, hermeneutically aware framework that prevents deprivation and distortion from concentrating within protected groups. Through controlled simulations, we explore trade-offs between economic utility, classical distributive fairness constraints, and hermeneutical cost. The results show that purely utility-based allocation drives under-delivery to the disadvantaged group. When the hermeneutical stakes of withholding ads are high, distributive constraints reduce hermeneutical cost at modest utility loss. Conversely, weighting hermeneutical cost without distributive constraints can yield policies concentrated on the disadvantaged group. These findings motivate expanding fairness analyses of online advertising beyond distributive notions to include epistemic conditions of interpretation and uptake.

Related papers

• Partial Fairness Awareness: Belief-Guided Strategic Mechanism for Strategic Agents [23.40393298376199]
  We propose the problem of partial fairness awareness (PFA)<n>We introduce a belief-guided strategic mechanism, wherein agents iteratively interact with the decision system and maintain a belief distribution over the candidate set of fairness constraints.<n>This belief-guided process enables agents, through iterative interaction and feedback, to update their belief distribution over the candidate set, thereby gradually aligning their belief with the grounding fairness constraint employed by the system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T17:53:43Z)
• Post-hoc Provider Fairness Adaptation via Hierarchical Exposure Alignment [54.58748721533078]
  Post-hoc Fairness Adaptation (PFA) is a lightweight framework that equips a frozen recommender with a fairness adapter.<n>It learns personalized additive score adjustments from user-item embeddings to steer provider exposure toward fairness.<n>PFA achieves substantial fairness gains with negligible accuracy loss, consistently outperforming strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T16:32:52Z)
• Optimal Fair Aggregation of Crowdsourced Noisy Labels using Demographic Parity Constraints [4.133245571268133]
  We analyze the fairness s of crowdsourced aggregation methods within the $varepsilon$-fairness framework.<n>We show that the fairness gap of the aggregated consensus converges exponentially fast to that of the ground-truth under interpretable conditions.<n>Since ground-truth itself may still be unfair, we generalize a state-of-the-art multiclass fairness post-processing algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T17:45:32Z)
• Breaking the Dyadic Barrier: Rethinking Fairness in Link Prediction Beyond Demographic Parity [5.932575574212546]
  We argue that demographic parity does not meet desired properties for fairness assessment in ranking-based tasks such as link prediction.<n>We formalize the limitations of existing fairness evaluations and propose a framework that enables a more expressive assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-09T22:58:29Z)
• Counterfactual Realizability [52.85109506684737]
  We introduce a formal definition of realizability, the ability to draw samples from a distribution, and then develop a complete algorithm to determine whether an arbitrary counterfactual distribution is realizable.<n>We illustrate the implications of this new framework for counterfactual data collection using motivating examples from causal fairness and causal reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T20:54:27Z)
• Finite-Sample and Distribution-Free Fair Classification: Optimal Trade-off Between Excess Risk and Fairness, and the Cost of Group-Blindness [14.421493372559762]
  We quantify the impact of enforcing algorithmic fairness and group-blindness in binary classification under group fairness constraints. We propose a unified framework for fair classification that provides distribution-free and finite-sample fairness guarantees with controlled excess risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T20:04:17Z)
• Fairness-Accuracy Trade-Offs: A Causal Perspective [58.06306331390586]
  We analyze the tension between fairness and accuracy from a causal lens for the first time.<n>We show that enforcing a causal constraint often reduces the disparity between demographic groups.<n>We introduce a new neural approach for causally-constrained fair learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T11:19:52Z)
• Fair Clustering: A Causal Perspective [5.885238773559016]
  We show that optimising for non-causal fairness notions can paradoxically induce direct discriminatory effects from a causal standpoint. We present a clustering approach that incorporates causal fairness metrics to provide a more nuanced approach to fairness in unsupervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T15:58:03Z)
• How Robust is Your Fairness? Evaluating and Sustaining Fairness under Unseen Distribution Shifts [107.72786199113183]
  We propose a novel fairness learning method termed CUrvature MAtching (CUMA) CUMA achieves robust fairness generalizable to unseen domains with unknown distributional shifts. We evaluate our method on three popular fairness datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T02:37:50Z)
• Measuring Fairness of Text Classifiers via Prediction Sensitivity [63.56554964580627]
  ACCUMULATED PREDICTION SENSITIVITY measures fairness in machine learning models based on the model's prediction sensitivity to perturbations in input features. We show that the metric can be theoretically linked with a specific notion of group fairness (statistical parity) and individual fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-16T15:00:33Z)
• Adversarial Robustness through the Lens of Causality [105.51753064807014]
  adversarial vulnerability of deep neural networks has attracted significant attention in machine learning. We propose to incorporate causality into mitigating adversarial vulnerability. Our method can be seen as the first attempt to leverage causality for mitigating adversarial vulnerability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-11T06:55:02Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.