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

351–360 of 568 posts

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#351

Post by twblalock »

LanceH wrote: post #342

So if I get a radio license and then broadcast an illegal ad, it's the FCC's fault. Why is everyone trying so hard to turn facebook (and google, twitter, etc...) into a filter on everything we say? When facebook gets held responsible for all content in all jurisdiction it will err on the side of proscription. It was only about 10 years ago that many now acceptable (mandatory even) progressive positions were not in fa…

Facebook is the publisher of the ads and is responsible for obeying the law.

If someone asks Facebook to publish an illegal ad, Facebook should not do it.

This is not a free speech issue, or a political speech issue. Nobody is censoring progressive or conservative positions in this case. It's an issue of legality in real estate advertising under a framework of laws that were written decades ago.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#352

Post by scarface74 »

AdamM12 wrote: post #64

Why is Facebook in trouble for this and not the persons who actually placed the ads? They aren't the ones renting the real estate. They don't own it. Government overreach imo. Edit: grammatical mistakes

Because it’s the law. Newspapers also take steps to make sure they are compliant with the Fair Housing Act.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#353

Post by dnautics »

asveikau wrote: post #348
dnautics wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent post asked the question in general, not specific to housing.

Incorrect. The parent cited housing law quite specifically. The first link at the top of the comment has the word "housing" right in the title.

> I do understand why Facebook would allow ad display filtering by race and other demographic categorizations since they are a media organization who sells advertising. Whether or not that practice is morally qualified or agreeable it makes sense from a business perspective (oh how I do detest advertising).

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#354

Post by mjcl »

protomyth wrote: post #276
jerf wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

Furthermore, Facebook has already tried this. After the first ProPublica article (last year, I think) they added a “I’m not breaking the law” checkbox.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#355

Post by vageli »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #282
skywhopper wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What is the problem with not showing rental ads to people with kids? If landlord does not want to rent out to people with kids - I (as a parent with kids) do NOT want to see that ad. How forcing landlord to advertise to categories they do not want to serve -- would help to anybody?

Because it's illegal to discriminate on the basis of having kids?

https://www.thebalance.com/fair-housing-act-violation-179889...

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#356

Post by twblalock »

swerveonem wrote: post #318
samfisher83 wrote: post #49

These are the specific points they are going after: -display housing ads either only to men or women; -not show ads to Facebook users interested in an "assistance dog," "mobility scooter," "accessibility" or "deaf culture"; -not show ads to users whom Facebook categorizes as interested in "child care" or "parenting," or show ads only to users with children above a specified age; -to display/not display ads to users w…

Facebook did this or housing companies used the Facebook targeting boolean option to configure ad campaigns in this way?

It doesn't really make a difference, because when housing companies use Facebook's targeting options it is still Facebook who accepts the ad and publishes it on facebook.com.

If you do something illegal because someone asked you to do it, it's still illegal.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#357

Post by asveikau »

dnautics wrote: post #353
asveikau wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. The parent cited housing law quite specifically. The first link at the top of the comment has the word "housing" right in the title.

> I do understand why Facebook would allow ad display filtering by race and other demographic categorizations since they are a media organization who sells advertising. Whether or not that practice is morally qualified or agreeable it makes sense from a business perspective (oh how I do detest advertising).

That's them agreeing with you that it's not illegal in the general case, and makes sense, even.

But the very start of the post says it's illegal for housing.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#358

Post by MBCook »

UncleEntity wrote: post #297
MBCook wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you ignore the section which prohibits overt (and blatantly illegal) discrimination Why should we ignore it? It sounds like Facebook allows you to use those exact things to target your ad. Thus the problem.

Because it applies to cases like "only WASP's need apply" and is clearly not what HUD is concerned with here. Absolutely nobody is arguing that Facebook isn't liable in such a case because it's clearly spelled out in the letter of the law.

I would think HUD would be very concerned about the fact you can run a housing ad and choose “don’t show the black people“.

Yes it’s blatant discrimination, and that’s exactly the problem.

The ability to say “don’t show to fans of Soulja Boy“ could certainly be a big problem, and I’m sure they might look into that too, but the first one is still there.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#359

Post by flgb »

LanceH wrote: post #342

So if I get a radio license and then broadcast an illegal ad, it's the FCC's fault. Why is everyone trying so hard to turn facebook (and google, twitter, etc...) into a filter on everything we say? When facebook gets held responsible for all content in all jurisdiction it will err on the side of proscription. It was only about 10 years ago that many now acceptable (mandatory even) progressive positions were not in fa…

> So if I get a radio license and then broadcast an illegal ad, it's the FCC's fault.

How is Facebook the FCC and not the broadcaster in this metaphor?

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#360

Post by throwawayqwx2 »

LanceH wrote: post #342

So if I get a radio license and then broadcast an illegal ad, it's the FCC's fault. Why is everyone trying so hard to turn facebook (and google, twitter, etc...) into a filter on everything we say? When facebook gets held responsible for all content in all jurisdiction it will err on the side of proscription. It was only about 10 years ago that many now acceptable (mandatory even) progressive positions were not in fa…

there needs to be a dmca for ads.
Post reply on HN