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

Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 21 posts

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#11

Post by mordocai »

chadgeidel wrote: post #10
mordocai wrote: post #8

Obviously not a lawyer but however you feel about it I don't think this technically violates the fair housing act by the letter of the law. The advertisement itself(as seen by the public) does not indicate "any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin." Rather, who is shown the advertisement is limited. You can argue that targeted adv…

I'm struggling with this comment. The article is a conversation answering this very question. A lawyer thinks it does violate the Act, because the Act makes this form of "targeted advertising" illegal. I might of course disagree with that assessment, but I would defer to a lawyer to make a case why it wouldn't be illegal.

There is a single quote from a single lawyer and all it says is that he thinks it is a violation. There is nothing from the lawyer concerning targeted advertising specifically. From my point of view, he saw the UI screenshot and screamed that it was a violation without any further research (the article backs this up since it says he gasped and immediately responded).

I don't find that a very convincing legal assessment and the article seems to assume that it is violating the act due to that statement with no proof or reasoning backing it up.

Edit: To me, this is no different from choosing to mail advertisements to various zip codes or neighborhoods based on demographics.

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#12

Post by DamnYuppie »

SerLava wrote: post #7
chinese_dan wrote: post #2

I see no problem here. There aren't excluding certain races from purchasing their products, merely excluding them from seeing the advertising for it. If I'm a white male, why would I want to see advertisements for skincare products designed for African-American women? The advertisers would lose money as well, because instead of advertising to me, they could advertise it to someone that has a higher chance of clicking…

You can't make a racist housing ad and then defend yourself by saying you're not actually blocking people by race. The racist ad is a crime in itself.

I am having a hard time understanding how an add can be racist. How is not wanting to show/pay for ads to one demographic or another?

If those that are most likely to purchase my product are of a certain race, age, or location I am going to focus my resources there.

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#13

Post by chadgeidel »

mordocai wrote: post #11
chadgeidel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling with this comment. The article is a conversation answering this very question. A lawyer thinks it does violate the Act, because the Act makes this form of "targeted advertising" illegal. I might of course disagree with that assessment, but I would defer to a lawyer to make a case why it wouldn't be illegal.

There is a single quote from a single lawyer and all it says is that he thinks it is a violation. There is nothing from the lawyer concerning targeted advertising specifically. From my point of view, he saw the UI screenshot and screamed that it was a violation without any further research (the article backs this up since it says he gasped and immediately responded). I don't find that a very convincing legal assessme…

I see. Thanks for explaining your position.

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#15

Post by SerLava »

DamnYuppie wrote: post #12
SerLava wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't make a racist housing ad and then defend yourself by saying you're not actually blocking people by race. The racist ad is a crime in itself.

I am having a hard time understanding how an add can be racist. How is not wanting to show/pay for ads to one demographic or another? If those that are most likely to purchase my product are of a certain race, age, or location I am going to focus my resources there.

In this case there would be a clear motivation to exclude people of a certain race from living in your buildings.

The ad content may be neutral, but the person performing the act of advertisement is racist.

How about a newspaper ad that tells people to tell their white friends about some great housing? Technically those people down the chain are performing non-racist advertisements, but only to their white friends.

You couldn't tell a bunch of people this, so why could you tell a newspaper staffer to do this?

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#16

Post by ubernostrum »

mordocai wrote: post #11
chadgeidel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling with this comment. The article is a conversation answering this very question. A lawyer thinks it does violate the Act, because the Act makes this form of "targeted advertising" illegal. I might of course disagree with that assessment, but I would defer to a lawyer to make a case why it wouldn't be illegal.

There is a single quote from a single lawyer and all it says is that he thinks it is a violation. There is nothing from the lawyer concerning targeted advertising specifically. From my point of view, he saw the UI screenshot and screamed that it was a violation without any further research (the article backs this up since it says he gasped and immediately responded). I don't find that a very convincing legal assessme…

You admit you are not a lawyer, but give and prefer your own opinion on it over that of someone who is a lawyer in the relevant field, and when confronted with the opinion of the lawyer in the relevant field you choose the least charitable explanation of how that lawyer came to give the opinion, in order to continue preferring your view over the lawyer's.

But tech people don't have blind spots or problems when it comes to issues like race, nope, no sir.

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#17

Post by danudey »

mordocai wrote: post #11
chadgeidel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling with this comment. The article is a conversation answering this very question. A lawyer thinks it does violate the Act, because the Act makes this form of "targeted advertising" illegal. I might of course disagree with that assessment, but I would defer to a lawyer to make a case why it wouldn't be illegal.

There is a single quote from a single lawyer and all it says is that he thinks it is a violation. There is nothing from the lawyer concerning targeted advertising specifically. From my point of view, he saw the UI screenshot and screamed that it was a violation without any further research (the article backs this up since it says he gasped and immediately responded). I don't find that a very convincing legal assessme…

The law apparently makes it illegal to create an ad which expresses any preference for a specific racial group. I would assume his argument is that by being invisible to a certain racial group, you are expressing a preference against them.

Re: Facebook lets advertisers exclude users by race

#18

Post by mdpm »

If I hired someone to stand outside and cover up some share of the offerings on my store's billboard, clearly varying only by the perceived race of whoever was walking by, the discrimination here would be violently evident.

Regardless of specific laws and statutes this may violate, it's an affront to every part of the progress we've made as a species. In my country, South Africa, this tool seems to be literally against the constitutional principles (Chapter 2, ss 9, 3-4).

Regardless of moral or legal questions even, do we not need to query what the societal cost is of allowing corporations to be facile and duplicitous, automatically, at the scale of enterprises like Facebook?

Post reply on HN