Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

hud.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 568 posts

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#271

Post by skywhopper »

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…

You're missing the point, though, which is not that the advertisers can target the models in the ads, but so they can choose _not_ to show ads to "undesireable" people, like people with kids, or of a certain ethnicity or religion. This sort of practice is an extremely pervasive problem that has led to enormous amounts of systemic inequality.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#272

Post by protomyth »

AdamM12 wrote: post #182
joejerryronnie wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically, the people who placed the ads are also liable. Practically speaking, which one sounds better: "HUD files discrimination complaint against Facebook" or "HUD files discrimination complaint against Jimmy's Duplex-Mania in rural Alabama"?

But is HUD going after them?

HUD wouldn't be the ones to go after them. Per how the US Government works, the Department of Justice[1] would be the ones to go after the individuals involved. If you go to the DoJ website they have some very recent press releases on redlining prosecution, but I get the feeling it would take a while to figure out if any are related to Facebook ads (there search sucks).

1) https://www.justice.gov/usao/about-offices-united-states-att...

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#273

Post by throwawaymath »

nostromo wrote: post #257
throwawaymath wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're describing makes sense, but would it not also be possible with inclusion-based targeting instead of exclusion-based targeting?

Is there a difference?

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that inclusionary targeting is legal whereas exclusionary targeting is not, and exclusionary targeting is what's happening. Inclusionary targeting uses logic of the form, "This user corresponds to subgroup A; load content specialized for subgroup A." Exclusionary targeting is of the form, "This user corresponds to subgroup A; do not load any content for this user."

If you'd like to target a specific demographic you can do so using either inclusionary or exclusionary targeting. Only one of those systems also allows you to explicitly exclude one or more groups rather than just target a subset of groups. Your example seems to be a very charitable interpretation of how exclusionary targeting could be used. There's (probably) nothing wrong with it if it's used that way. But you could just as easily use the system you described to prevent a variety of protected demographics from being able to see the advertisement whatsoever.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#274

Post by zaroth »

pvg wrote: post #266
SamReidHughes wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...what? Are you suggesting it's a good thing that we bring back red lining and other discriminatory practices? Putting words into people's mouths like that is incredibly rude, and dishonest.

That might be phrased stridently but it's not 'putting words into someone's mouth'. It's a question.

I think OP could have found a better way to word it which wouldn’t seem so hostile and accusatory, if they spent another few seconds before clicking ‘reply’.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#275

Post by quotemstr »

jogjayr wrote: post #261
quotemstr wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's a hypothetical question. Does it really correlate with protected group memberships?

> Does it really correlate with protected group memberships?

Yes: "the vast majority of families (73%) who buy organic describe themselves as white" [1]

Now, you might say, "Okay then. Let's prohibit ad targeting by food preference." But the trouble is that there are hundreds of factors that correlate with protected group membership. Are you going to ban them all?

[1] https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2015/04/03/Who-buy...

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#276

Post by protomyth »

jerf wrote: post #57
joelhaasnoot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do they determine what's a housing ad? There's two pieces to this a) Facebook makes this possible and b) Facebook damns themselves and promotes that they make this possible for housing. Part b is easy to fix: make it harder to do housing ads that are targeted. However, part a is much harder: what stops me from advertising my AirBnb listing as a URL on Facebook as a "generic ad"?

"How do they determine what's a housing ad?" You ask the user to say what type of ad it is, under penalty of violation of contract, and contractually obligate them to carry the legal risk if they lie. There's no requirement that it be done via some fancy ML algorithm. I would expect that unless FB actively attempts to piss off the government, that would pass legal muster. Goodness knows I've signed enough agreements…

> contractually obligate them to carry the legal risk if they lie

The government is under no obligation to look at the terms of a civil contract when they decide who to prosecute.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#277

Post by iamleppert »

Wow, this page is pretty damning evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/business/success/quadrant-homes

It basically is showing that Facebook knowingly implemented a system to discriminate against people. Even the stock photos are full of white people.

Here's hoping HUD makes a big example out of them and fines them to the fullest extent of the law.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#278

Post by quotemstr »

jogjayr wrote: post #262
quotemstr wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's just one of the charges. The others are even more damning - targeting by sex, religion or country of origin.

> That's just one of the charges. The others are even more damning

Irrelevant. Your claim is that targeting limitations cover only protected class membership itself and not proxies for protected class membership. I provided an example of the HUD penalizing Facebook for allowing targeting by a proxy.

How is pointing out that the HUD is also complaining about non-proxy targeting supposed to invalidate my point about the HUD targeting a proxy?

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#279

Post by schrodinger »

rland wrote: post #135
emilfihlman wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Giant multinational corporations are squarely last in the "queue of parties that ought to commit civil disobedience."

I agree in this case, but I’d disagree if it were Apple refusing to unlock iPhones for authorities, so I’m not sure I can agree this is universal.
Post reply on HN