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

Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#131

Post by ubernostrum »

eappleby wrote: post #82
obmelvin wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were to only recruit from single gender schools then I personally would have an issue with it, same as this issue. However, if you are recruiting from many universities and some happen to be single gender, that is not discriminating.

What if the companies that were placing job ads on Facebook were also placing job ads on other platforms that weren't targeted to men only? Playing devils advocate here...

The devil probably has enough advocates at this point and doesn't need your contribution.

But in general, there are classes of ads that you just can't target based on certain classes, period. Even if you hypothetically might have the ability to target a counterbalancing ad somewhere else. Facebook repeatedly has been in hot water over this, and both they and the people using their ad platform to do this stuff need to get more than a slap on the wrist, in order to deter others from trying the same in the future.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#134

Post by zeroname »

gehwartzen wrote: post #118

For those interested here is a link to The Code of Federal Regulations: Title 29 (Labor): Part 1604 “Guidelines On Discrimination Because of Sex” which describes the relevant legal requirements/interpretations pertaining to employer sex discrimination. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title29-vol4/xml/CFR-...

" § 1604.5 Job opportunities advertising.

It is a violation of title VII for a help-wanted advertisement to indicate a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sex unless sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for the particular job involved. The placement of an advertisement in columns classified by publishers on the basis of sex, such as columns headed “Male” or “Female,” will be considered an expression of a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on sex."

Seems to me like they're legally in the clear, as long as the ad itself doesn't contain any indication. Same as only advertising in a publication whose readers are 99% male - Google's gender metrics aren't even that precise.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#135

Post by mantas »

bduerst wrote: post #130
mantas wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we make sure every company that sends recruiters to Barnard's career fair also send recruiters to men-only college career fair?

That's a pointless, loaded question. HR and legal depts that don't want their company to be sued for violating Title VII will make sure that they aren't recruiting only from Barnard, unless they're some bona fide exception (e.g. hiring models for women's clothing). This idea that they need to recruit from men's only career fairs is your own.

I'm saying that one-gender-only job advertising is not a novelty that happened for the first time in Facebook.

As other commenter pointed out, how is this different from advertising in women/men magazine? Should we ban those as well? Sure, one can argue that their readers are only 98% one gender. But then some people on FB lie about their gender and some browse FB on somebody else's account. E.g. My GF never logs out off Facebook on shared devices and I see ads targeting women all the time.

All in all, we should look at bigger problem of targeted advertising rather exclusive loaded cases. I've no idea what targeted advertising line is "good enough". On the other hand, targeted advertising is definitely causing massive societal problems and political polarisation.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#136

Post by zonidjan »

The most prominent organization named is Uber, who it's safe to assume is running multiple ad's at a time, which probably includes some targeted at men and some targeted at women (even if it's as simple as changing out the stock photo).

Oh, and "The Pennsylvania State Police, for example, boosted a post targeted to men ..." well of course, why would they pay to advertise to females when they don't need to? You should go research the demographics of police (or visit your local donut shop): almost exclusively male, because most females don't want to do it. And if a female does want to... well, then she should go apply?

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#138

Post by telaport »

patmcc wrote: post #7

I'm a bit mixed about this; it is clearly discriminatory to publish a job ad that says "women need not apply", but it doesn't feel inherently discriminatory to advertise a job in, say, "Men's Health" but not "Cosmopolitan" magazine. Or to advertise on a particular television channel or program (whose viewers may not match the population at large). That's just how advertising works. Is that crazy? Would this be differ…

You're telling me, if I run a clinic or rehab facility where women with trauma are more comfortable with other female therapists, I'm somehow required to advertise to and interview both men and women for a job - even when I'm only short on demand for a female therapist from a specific demographic or with certain qualifications? The same would go for a shortage of male employees based on patient or clientele requests and demands.

I'm not saying Uber has a reason to do this. They may or may not, but to say this feature or ability is illegal is just idiotic. In fact, it's rather useful and worth paying for in my opinion.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#139

Post by zeroname »

aikah wrote: post #126
j16sdiz wrote: post #123

I think the problem is with the employer, not the platform. I don't understand why Facebook should be blamed here. How is it possible for a global platform cater each and every local custom?

> I think the problem is with the employer, not the platform No, the platform gives the tools to specifically filter by sex. Facebook is enabling sexual discrimination. > every local custom euphemism You mean the law, the very thing that will get your in legal troubles if you break it. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to discriminate by sex when it comes to employment in US, and Facebook is an american company.

> No, the platform gives the tools to specifically filter by sex. Facebook is enabling sexual discrimination.

Like any ad seller, Facebook offers displaying ads based on demographics. This is a basic requirement for many advertisers, because a lot of products happen to be bought exclusively by one gender. You have a right to buy tampons, you don't have a right to be displayed advertisements for tampons.

Even if there were legal problems with those particular Uber ads, it's Uber's responsibility to follow the law, it's not Facebooks responsibility to screen every ad for possible infringements.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#140

Post by Darmani »

obmelvin wrote: post #71
eappleby wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about recruiting from all-female schools like Barnard?

If you were to only recruit from single gender schools then I personally would have an issue with it, same as this issue. However, if you are recruiting from many universities and some happen to be single gender, that is not discriminating.

Duolingo has a policy of only recruiting from schools that have an above-average percent of women in their CS program. How do you feel about that?
Post reply on HN