HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook • Hacker News Board

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#241

Post by dominotw » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:16 PM UTC

jogjayr wrote: post #229

dominotw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about housing ad posted only in places like whole foods or a particular newspaper. I know my previous landlady did this.

It seems to me that even though the intention of that is discriminatory in some way (and not necessarily against protected classes - the Whole Foods ads might be simply to target higher-income tenants), it's not in fact exclusionary. There's nothing preventing anyone who's not the normal target of these ads from going to Whole Foods or buying those newspapers. In FB's case the excluded audience has no chance of ever…

> There's nothing preventing anyone who's not the normal target of these ads from going to Whole Foods

You could argue whole foods prices do prevent vast majority of ppl from going to whole foods.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#242

Post by quotemstr » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:18 PM UTC

jogjayr wrote: post #239

quotemstr wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it inherently wrong to publish an ad in the Wall Street Journal and not then publish the same ad in Teen Vogue?

No. Because anyone can buy the WSJ and Teen Vogue and see the ad. If you're excluded from being targeted by an FB ad you have no chance of seeing it. If that exclusion criteria forms the basis of a protected class and the ad in question relates to housing, that's illegal. So it's a very narrow set of behaviors that are wrong here, not all of ad targeting. E.g. it's probably not illegal (or even morally wrong) to excl…

I'm not sure it's that easy. The complaint dings Facebook for allowing targeting of ads by zip code. Isn't it the case in principle that people choose to live in certain areas? I don't think that discriminating on the basis of voluntary association that happens to correlate with protected group membership is enough to spare one from HUD's gaze.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#243

Post by dibstern » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:19 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #234

In most verticals marketers will have a set of ads for different demographics: say gay, suburban, latino, black, Spanish-speaking, etc. Each of those campaigns will have different creative: for example, a real estate ad targeted to latinos will have an image showing a smiling latino couple. I can understand why the marketer would not want to show this creative to white, black, or asians -- given that they're targetin…

The problem is total exclusion, not targeting for sub-groups by campaign. If they wanted to target sub-groups by campaign, they could offer a service to advertise differently to different subgroups. But that’s not at all what’s happening - this is an exclusion of some subgroups, where the only feasible reason for their exclusion is their demographic, rather than the good/service being sold or the type of advertisement.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#244

Post by xxpor » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:20 PM UTC

emilfihlman wrote: post #128

maratd wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is your argument? That if there's a bad law on the books, we shouldn't have laws?

Or perhaps that if the law is bad, we should engage in civil disobedience.

Yes, Facebook should commit civil disobedience by explicitly allowing housing ads to not be shown to black people. Great plan.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#245

Post by gpm » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:20 PM UTC

MBCook wrote: post #142

AdamM12 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that the law shouldn't even be on the books imo. The person discriminating is the private property owner/manager they engaged in the advertising. Facebook did not.

Knives have legal uses. In the context of housing ads (or employment) these tools DO NOT have legal uses. Thus they are illegal.

That seems like a poor argument for why it should be illegal, since facebook ads are not limited to housing and employment.

The analogous argument for knives would be "In the context of torture knives don't have any legal uses. (So knife sellers need to put safe guards in preventing their knives from torturing people)".

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#246

Post by throwawaymath » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:21 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #233

jonathanyc wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you seriously comparing advertising job openings to doctors with advertising apartments to only people of a certain race? You can’t just parameterize “x” and call it an argument.

A better comparison is advertising in a catholic newspaper. Is that a discrimination toward non catholics? It’s a bit of a stretch.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, there is no analogue in traditional (read: newspaper) advertising.

If you take out an advertisement in a Catholic newspaper, you're focusing on Catholics. But non-Catholics may still read your advertisement if they come upon your newspaper. There is no method in traditional physical media to specifically exclude any demographic; there are only ways to emphasize one demographic over another. This makes digital advertising with demographic-based exclusion (rather than demographic-based inclusion) incomparable to a newspaper.

That difference may seem hollow but it is a difference of category, rather than degree. More important than this point is the observation that these kinds of debates quickly devolve into litigating the appropriateness of imperfect analogies rather than the original issue itself.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#247

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:21 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #80

wcrichton wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It stops at the product, no? It seems more acceptable to target advertisements for toys than housing.

Should Facebook be liable for allowing an advertiser to target a housing ad at people with preferences for organic food?

No. Because a preference for organic food isn't a protected class.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#248

Post by doctorless » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:22 PM UTC

cpkpad wrote: post #230

EB66 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And that’s not even necessarily a bad thing. ...what? Are you suggesting it's a good thing that we bring back red lining and other discriminatory practices?

I don't think that's what's being suggested. The idea that redlining should be reexamined by the courts every half century or so is what's being suggested. In 2018, courts ought to find its still illegal give facebook a book fine. In 2118? Hopefully we'll be past racism and courts will find the concept obsolete and antiquated. Or they may find racism is common but the tools needed to manage it are different. The Inte…

Having been in a mixed-race relationship where one partner is brown, I can tell you firsthandedly that if you think racism is rare, then you’re probably white or Asian or you have consistently lived in areas where racism is actually rare. I lived in places where when I was young, I never saw anyone engage in racist behaviors. This changed the moment I entered that relationship. It may have ended long ago, but it’s definitely made me more aware of the subtle ways that people show prejudice when it’s not outright. Is it a majority? No. At least one in ten? Much closer to reality. We’ve got a long way to go, even still. Don’t forget that schools were still segregated in America less than a century ago — there are leaders in government and industry that grew up in that environment. You’ve got at least two generations to die off before we can really say that the impacts of that era are negligible.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#249

Post by quotemstr » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:22 PM UTC

jogjayr wrote: post #247

quotemstr wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should Facebook be liable for allowing an advertiser to target a housing ad at people with preferences for organic food?

No. Because a preference for organic food isn't a protected class.

What if it correlates with protected group membership, like zip code does?

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#250

Post by xxpor » Sat, Aug 18, 2018, 11:23 PM UTC

jimnotgym wrote: post #184

Can anyone tell me what kind of penalty Facebook could face for this? Are we talking a) A token fine b) A fine large enough that it sees investors taking action against the management c) A fine that is an existential threat to Facebook d) Jail time for executives e) Forced closure I just wonder if anyone can suggest how serious this could be if they are found to be I the wrong?

I think most likely is a consent decree that says they're not allowed to engage in this behavior, and the gov has the right to inspect their operations to ensure compliance. That along with a token fine.