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

521–530 of 568 posts

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#521

Post by gt_ »

jahewson wrote: post #385
matchagaucho wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of the responsibility falls on the Landlord, given they created the targeted ad segments? It's not like the Facebook Ad Manager has a guided wizard for the real estate industry to target prospective tenants.

Facebook knows exactly what kind of advertisers they have on their platform. https://www.facebook.com/business/success/quadrant-homes

This language is over the top. It elicits the coherency of what I’d describe as a full-time partial orgasm and nothing more.

Here are some of the more offensive bits but you really have to click on the link to get full effect.

“...strategic audience targeting and ads optimized for higher intent...”

“...specific lookalike audience...”

“...filtered out less qualified leads...”

“...key employers...

“...people with interests in real estate...”

“...lookalike audiences consisting of people who are similar to its clients...”

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#522

Post by gt_ »

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 was a collaborative effort.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#523

Post by ryanwaggoner »

danmg wrote: post #380
chickenfries wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of Facebook, you either put this in your profile, or the kinds of pages and events that you like and interact with will give this away. Not saying that it's not creepy, just that with the way we use the internet these days, it's not an epic feat for an advertiser to figure this out given the amount of data we put out there.

Actually in this case it's pretty easy. If you're gay and use dating apps, and didn't opt out of application usage history in your settings, the presence of those apps in your history will flag you as having that interest to advertisers. The google analytics get resold/repackaged, either directly or indirectly through data brokers, to Facebook. Facebook suddenly starts displaying ads for expensive mens' underwear.

Really? Google Analytics repackages and sells user data to third party data brokers?

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#524

Post by jakelazaroff »

erik_seaberg wrote: post #312
reaperducer wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that easy If a small town newspaper with a staff of 30 can do it, Facebook has both the staff and resources to do the same. If it cannot, or will not, it should not take advertisements for sectors that are regulated.

But small town newspapers are endangered by those costs! Facebook only makes about $6 ARPU. Automating the crap out of everything is what enables them to exist.

Elaborating a bit on the sibling comments, Facebook has no "right" to exist as a business. If the only reason it can exist is by ignoring laws with which other businesses are able to comply, it should be shut down (or alternately, forced to obey those laws and then "corrected" out of business by the market).

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#526

Post by pests »

bonzini wrote: post #511
pests wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lengths at which you are going to rationalize racism just astounds me. Answer me this. How on Facebook you would expect an excluded person to be able to know about the sale? They wouldn't. The housing listing doesn't exist for them. How do you see this as fair?! I am blown away by all the casual racism all throughout this thread.

I don't see it as fair. I am not American so I am not familiar with the law. The other comment that replied to me explained why it's also illegal, without accusing anyone of racism. I still don't believe that merely providing the option to create potentially discriminatory ads is a problem for Facebook, since the same options have perfectly valid usage. It should be the landlord's responsibility to use them correctly…

Why not disable them when it's invalid usage then?

Who did I accuse of racism? I stated people in the thread are being casually racist but didn't name any names.

Haven't we been learning as developers or operators that it's better to put processes and systems in place to prevent human error opposed to relying on human judgement alone? Why the slack with this issue?

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#527

Post by throwaway76543 »

astura wrote: post #447
throwaway76543 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a strictly incorrect metaphor. Radio stations aren't liable in this scenario. Neither are newspapers with illegal personal ads for discriminatory housing. There's no way they can be liable because they can't know if the ads are illegal or not. The legality of a given ad depends on many factors not always present in the ad itself -- such as whether the landlord lives in one of the units. All of the above selectio…

>Neither are newspapers with illegal personal ads for discriminatory housing. Yes they are! The FHA specifically applies to housing ads! >The legality of a given ad depends on many factors not always present in the ad itself -- such as whether the landlord lives in one of the units. All of the above selection criteria are perfectly OK to filter by if a landlord occupies a unit in a building with less than 4 units. No…

> Yes they are!

No, they are not.

> The FHA specifically applies to housing ads!

As I explained, the FHA applies to certain /kinds/ of housing ads. The determination of whether the FHA applies at all is dependent on a multitude of factors which an advertising middle-man cannot easily know.

Some advertisers opt to respond by applying broad content bans, but this is not reflective of the underlying law.

You will not develop an accurate understanding of the law by trying to reverse engineer it through reading various corporate policies.

> No, discriminatory ads are illegal (other than sex in a roommate situation) even though discrimination in selection is legal in some cases.

This is flatly incorrect. There is no differentiation whatsoever in the FHA between different types of discrimination. They are all uniformly referenced and exempted. See 42 U.S. Code § 3604 Sec 804.

The exemptions mean the FHA restrictions do not apply at all. Nowhere is gender discrimination carved out differently from any other type.

> No, it's not legal.

Yeah, it is. I don't like it any more than you do, but this is a fact not a preference.

You are making a common error by ascribing common sense and reasonability to the law. Sometimes this can help frame broad tenets but in this particular case it is leading you to a demonstrably false conclusion.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#528

Post by vuln »

jimnotgym wrote: post #449
pertsix wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a small fine and remedial action to resolve the violation. This also happens to traditional businesses.

So I guess it might turn out to have been ap good business decision to ignore the law?

Yes, the fine whatever it is will be magnitudes less than the profit they made off of the ad discrimination.

Re: HUD Files Housing Discrimination Complaint Against Facebook

#530

Post by vuln »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #493
burkaman wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, your examples are potentially unlawful. See HUD's guidelines here: https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_7781.PDF > § 109.25 Selective use of advertising media or content. > (a) Selective geographic advertisements. Such selective use may involve the strategic placement of billboards; brochure advertisements distributed within a limited geographic area by hand or in the mail; advertising in particular geographi…

You can't conflate issues here. There are two major questions in play: 1) Is it unlawful for the advertiser to publish advertisements that may result in an individual selectively advertising? There seems to be no law or guidance even suggesting that the answer is yes here. For instance, under your guidance the billboard owner (who then rents it to the advertiser) would not be liable for not ensuring that the advertis…

Not the OP but all Facebook had to do was put up a simple click through when posting a housing ad. Something like - "This listing must comply with Federal law, by posting you claim full responsibility." and a link to the law.

In your example if I was the billboard owner and someone wanted to display an ad that was federally regulated I would absolve my liability by making the customer sign off on the fact that their ad complies with federal law.

Just seems so simple. I guess the money blinded them. Seems the status quo for Facebook.

Post reply on HN