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

241–250 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#241

Post by amelius »

Perhaps a silly question but why is gender (and perhaps ethnicity) the only type of discrimination everybody worries about when it comes to Facebook? Shouldn't we extend this to all the ways people differ?

For example, why should somebody who loves horse-riding not get the same job offerings as somebody who loves computer-programming, in all cases?

And why can employers exclude people who are interested in pregnancy-related things, or people with dangerous hobbies like basejumping?

Can't we start a petition for a ban on targeted advertisement, so we can stop this madness altogether? It would also solve a lot of privacy related problems.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#242

Post by feanaro »

craig_peacock wrote: post #227

I bet no one would blink an eye if Facebook allowed targeting jobs to only women. People really need to get over themselves, men and women inherently have different strengths, and so there are just some things that only men should do.

"should"? Men and women have different strengths on average, not on an individual level, so your conclusion that some things should be done by men only is unsound.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#244

Post by [deleted] »

pteredactyl wrote: post #30

I don't understand the problem. The flipside would be they're letting Job Advertisers only target women. I wonder what those numbers look like: What percentage of job advertisers only target women? If I'm spending ad dollars, why would I not choose the most effective form of advertising for me? That's not to say they're not hiring women. In which case it'd be more dubious. Last week in the Bay Area I heard a TSA radi…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#245

Post by bunderbunder »

ag71668 wrote: post #217
Endy wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with virtue, it's a matter of Facebook and its advertisers violating the written law. EEOC exists due to law, and all employers are required to abide by it. If you violate equal opportunity employment by discriminating for any one of a number of protected classes, you are acting unlawfully. Facebook should not be so openly allowed to violate the law, and for doing so, the individuals in the corpo…

Equal opportunity doesn't mean equal candidacy. Women are not prevented from applying for these jobs, nor are the ads hidden from women. But real-life demographic analysis shows that men are overwhelmingly the qualified demographic for this role. Advertising to that demographic is not against the law, and it is not discrimination. Forcing employers to waste resources equalizing the advertising efforts across worthles…

> Equal opportunity doesn't mean equal candidacy.

You're conflating your vernacular interpretation of the popular name of the law with the text of the law itself.

Regardless of how you interpret the phrase "equal opportunity", the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces the full text of employment discrimination laws, and not just their titles.

> But real-life demographic analysis shows that men are overwhelmingly the qualified demographic for this role.

Are you familiar with the phrase, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics?" I've seen some of these real-life demographic analyses that support this kind of conclusion, and they have an overwhelming tendency to be utter bunk.

> Advertising to that demographic is not against the law

In fact, it's been specifically prohibited in the USA since the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#246

Post by enraged_camel »

ag71668 wrote: post #217
Endy wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with virtue, it's a matter of Facebook and its advertisers violating the written law. EEOC exists due to law, and all employers are required to abide by it. If you violate equal opportunity employment by discriminating for any one of a number of protected classes, you are acting unlawfully. Facebook should not be so openly allowed to violate the law, and for doing so, the individuals in the corpo…

Equal opportunity doesn't mean equal candidacy. Women are not prevented from applying for these jobs, nor are the ads hidden from women. But real-life demographic analysis shows that men are overwhelmingly the qualified demographic for this role. Advertising to that demographic is not against the law, and it is not discrimination. Forcing employers to waste resources equalizing the advertising efforts across worthles…

>>nor are the ads hidden from women.

Huh? The ads are shown to only men. So how are they “not hidden” from women?

If I were a woman, I wouldn’t even be aware these ads exist. And if I did, in order to see them I would need to tell Facebook I’m a man. That means to me the ads are pretty damn hidden.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#247

Post by busterarm »

IanCal wrote: post #207
busterarm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really how digital advertising targeting works though. In fact, they go to great lengths to make sure you illegally exclude by a class (Google is especially strict about this) and don't transmit anything that is considered PII or "potentially PII". Gender, like IP address, is in the potentially PII realm. What this actually is going to do is target "people interested in typically male interests". That is g…

> That's not really how digital advertising targeting works though. In fact, they go to great lengths to make sure you illegally exclude by a class Facebook absolutely has an option to show your advert to a specific gender, though > Gender. Target ads to women, men or people of all genders. https://www.facebook.com/business/help/717368264947302?helpr... So what's happening after that point to stop you from restrictin…

I'm trying to explain that gender targeting is imprecise.

When I say the hit rate of ads targeting women is 50%, I mean that of the number of people who see ads that were targeted at women, only 50% of them were women. Targeting men works a little bit more consistently, by usually about 10%, but I don't know why.

That's industry-wide. I don't know if Facebook does better or not, but I have no reason to think so. Even if they did, it probably doesn't matter that much.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#248

Post by fjcp »

And what is wrong? Suppose I have a position already filled by a woman and now, for the sake of diversity, I need to hire a man to balance the world.

The real problem here is that some people will always cry and rant, regardless of the situation:

- Job ad for women? Sexist! We don't need you to tell us what to do.

- Job ad for men? Sexist! We can do that to!

- Job ad for both? Sexist! You should prioritize women, we are a minority.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#249

Post by busterarm »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #110
busterarm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really how digital advertising targeting works though. In fact, they go to great lengths to make sure you illegally exclude by a class (Google is especially strict about this) and don't transmit anything that is considered PII or "potentially PII". Gender, like IP address, is in the potentially PII realm. What this actually is going to do is target "people interested in typically male interests". That is g…

100 million????? Is this normal? Did it actually work? I always wondered on the ROI of ads. It must be high if spending $100 million has no one but me replying...

Every industry is different. As far as legal advertising goes, in many states it's heavily regulated (especially Florida); traditional spend still outperforms digital as far as lead quantity.

Depending on the campaign/type of spend, digital advertising tends to convert leads in a range somewhere between 0.02% and 10%. 10% is extraordinarily good. Lead quality largely depends on the type of case, but ROI on the good cases is anywhere from low 5/6-digit auto injury cases which require little effort from a lawyer to hundred-million and even billion dollar judgements/settlements.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#250

Post by richmarr »

fapjacks wrote: post #216
mdasen wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact One thing you might be interested in reading about is Disparate Impact. Discrimination cases can be proven by showing that a practice has a disproportionately adverse impact on members of a protected class, even in the absence of intentional discrimination. The Supreme Court noted in Griggs v. Duke Power Co that the Civil Rights Act bans "not only overt discrimination bu…

Speaking of smells, my initial reaction is that Disparate Impact smells broken. I can see pretty clearly how it would be possible to argue legally that advertising a job internally and not externally (to a company) is discriminatory. And following that further along, in this way, I can see a pretty straightforward method of declaring any job advertising as discriminatory under that decision. I think law like this is…

Are you a lawyer?
Post reply on HN