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

Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#61

Post by briandear »

notacoward wrote: post #31
piokoch wrote: post #10

I am not sure I understand the way Fair Housing Act is enforced. Facebook allows ads targeting. This is how it earns money. Apparently some people decided that they want to advertise houses to white Christians population, which is illegal in the USA - shouldn't be HUD after those who configured such criteria, not Facebook? Facebook provided only a tool. Nobody is after hardware store because a hammer bought there was…

> shouldn't be HUD after those who configured such criteria, not Facebook? Indeed they should. This is basically like going after the phone company because somebody else was using number prefixes as a proxy for race. Even though this is a fundamental property of any system that doesn't explicitly preclude such targeting, Facebook already took steps to limit this type of discrimination in ads for housing or credit. Th…

> this administration's own discriminatory agenda

What discriminatory agenda? By all economic measures, Americans of all races/ethnicities are doing better than they have been in a long time. See Robert Johnson's comments on the topic: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/04/10/bet_fo...

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#63

Post by briandear »

bilbo0s wrote: post #21
jdavis703 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These platforms can be overrun by a majority of discriminatory ads. I remember using Craigslist about a decade ago to rent housing in Virginia. Over half the ads easily contained some kind of gender, age, family or religious discrimination (interestingly enough I never saw an ad that explicitly listed race, I suspect that is because explicit racial discrimination is so taboo people used more implicit means of discrim…

> interestingly enough I never saw an ad that explicitly listed race... ??? That must've just been Virginia? Where I lived in Houston, they listed unacceptable races all the time. (I suppose they didn't have to though, it was always the same two races listed.)

> Where I lived in Houston, they listed unacceptable races all the time.

Definitely going to need a citation for this. I grew up in Houston and never saw an add specifying "unacceptable races" -- perhaps 50+ years ago maybe. My parents were in the rental business and we spent a lot of time looking at (and placing) ads -- never was race listed on an ad that I've ever seen for as long as I can remember (since the mid 1980s.) That doesn't mean it didn't happen, but there'll need to be some proof that the practice was widespread or common if you're to come on a forum and essentially libel a city as racist.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#64

Post by Consultant32452 »

ummonk wrote: post #47
noer wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full disclosure: I have a liberal arts degree. When I was looking at colleges, I had absolutely no idea what I wanted to do with the rest of my life. In high school, I really hated science and math classes. Years later I realized that I actually didn't but the single math teacher I had for four years of high school (it was a small school, I just had bad luck with what teachers were assigned to the classes I took). If…

>Looking back, I think it's ridiculous that we ask 16-18 year olds to make decisions about their careers. And just how far do you think extended adolescence should last? People have to start transitioning into adulthood and preparing for career and life at some point, even if they aren't fully mature and ready for it.

It's interesting to me that there's no single legal definition of adulthood. Voting, drinking, signing contracts, joining military, count as a dependent on insurance, buy a gun, rent a car... We don't seem to be able to decide, as a culture, when a person is responsible for themselves.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#65

Post by LarryDarrell »

notacoward wrote: post #46
LarryDarrell wrote: post #32

We have regulations on the books that are there as a result of 100 years of painful human experience. Wave a computer screen in someone's face and all of a sudden it's a different plane of existence and some people feel like these laws don't apply. I'm glad to see there is finally being some push back.

> some people feel like these laws don't apply That's catchy, but doesn't address the crucial question of which people should be held accountable for using a tool in a discriminatory way. You could argue that the publisher bears some or all of that responsibility, and I'd be fine with that, but shouldn't the advertisers bear some too? Why is HUD only going after Facebook and not them? Hint: the advertisers don't have…

FB is a great big platform. Of course they are going to be targeted first. Especially since they have the ability to stop the problem, just as the classified editor at a newspaper can decide, "No, I won't run this ad that says "No Blacks". As that would be a bad idea for both myself and the newspaper given the laws on the books that everyone knows about."

Given a finite amount of law enforcement manpower, it makes sense to target the pimp first. Especially if they are national in scale and flaunting it.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#66

Post by [deleted] »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #49
kyrieeschaton wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of which is actually alleged. The allegation is that FB allowed ad targeting, not that they allowed ads that "indicated a preference... or an intention to make any such preference". It's classic regulatory overreach over the course of 50 years, from disallowing ads that explicitly forbid blacks, to forbidding advertising in venues that haven't paid their diversity tax.

Targeting an ad specifically to avoid certain races indicates your intention to make such a preference. You're just telling Facebook you don't want those races rather than putting it in the actual ad text.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#67

Post by notacoward »

briandear wrote: post #61
notacoward wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> shouldn't be HUD after those who configured such criteria, not Facebook? Indeed they should. This is basically like going after the phone company because somebody else was using number prefixes as a proxy for race. Even though this is a fundamental property of any system that doesn't explicitly preclude such targeting, Facebook already took steps to limit this type of discrimination in ads for housing or credit. Th…

> this administration's own discriminatory agenda What discriminatory agenda? By all economic measures, Americans of all races/ethnicities are doing better than they have been in a long time. See Robert Johnson's comments on the topic: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/04/10/bet_fo...

Are you seriously trying to argue that an administration focused on border walls, ICE raids and entrapment, de-funding minority focused programs[1], and providing inspiration for racist killers around the world doesn't have a discriminatory agenda? Because that's just sea-lioning and I don't have any patience for it.

[1] https://thehill.com/policy/finance/334768-here-are-the-66-pr...

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#68

Post by floatrock »

closeparen wrote: post #60
LarryDarrell wrote: post #32

We have regulations on the books that are there as a result of 100 years of painful human experience. Wave a computer screen in someone's face and all of a sudden it's a different plane of existence and some people feel like these laws don't apply. I'm glad to see there is finally being some push back.

The historical precedent for Facebook ad targeting is allocating one's print ad budget according to the readership of a given periodical, or one's TV ad budget according to Nielsen's analysis of a show's audience. Or more personally, advertising the room for rent in your house at your white-collar job but not at the welfare office. Does the Fair Housing Act address this? Doesn't look like it.

How comparable is the historical precedent? Are facebook audiences comparable to different periodicals, or does the level of microtargetting available now make it more like putting your ad in copies of Time delivered to one part of town but not the addresses outside the redline?

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#69

Post by amanaplanacanal »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #59
whatok wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can totally see how this wasn't anything malicious and just done out of pure ignorance of the law. That said, I would expect this out of a small startup; not a massive corporation. This is actually where I can see the argument for increases in diversity as I can see how a homogeneous group of people being completely ignorant of the ramifications of this.

A large corporation should be able to afford lawyers that specialize in the legality of advertisements...

This is the weird thing. They don't have a legal team? Or are they just not listening to their lawyers? That's a bad idea for anybody.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#70

Post by will_brown »

notacoward wrote: post #58
bobydonahue wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, if the tool/service is by its very nature both discriminatory and a 'black box', the company who made/provides it is responsible for what it does. You can't just make millions selling an ethically questionable service and shift the blame to your customers who you kept in the dark.

> if the tool/service is by its very nature both discriminatory Is it, in this case? Ad targeting has a zillion legitimate use cases, including some that are outright humanitarian. Yes, it can also be used in a discriminatory way, but Facebook already tried to address that in the cases HUD only nominally cares about. Phone numbers and ZIP codes can also be (and often are) used as proxies for race. Should HUD go after…

I Agree certain ads can legitimately target on the basis of age, sex, race and religions.

However, as a multi billion dollar ad company FB knows these options are illegal in other instances. I’m not even sure those other companies you mention are ad companies or give advertisers the option to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race and religion like Facebook.

Last I used FB ads, the process included a submission of my ad to FB for review. Therefore, FB knows if an ad targets based on age, sex, race, and religion and I do think the onus shifts to them to throughly review these types of potentially illegal ads before publishing the same.

Certainly FB prohibits advertisers from publishing other types of illegal ads to avoid potential liability (try publishing a cigarette or alcohol ad targeting children) so it’s hard for them to bury their head in the sand on these matters and say they don’t bear any liability for the acts of their users.

Post reply on HN