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

141–150 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#141

Post by evil-olive »

telaport wrote: post #138
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…

> 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

No, you're not. This is a well-established area of the law, called a bona fide occupational qualification:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_qualifi...

> One example of bona fide occupational qualifications are mandatory retirement ages for bus drivers and airline pilots, for safety reasons. Further, in advertising, a manufacturer of men's clothing may lawfully advertise for male models. Religious belief may also be considered a BFOQ; for example, a religious school may lawfully require that members of its faculty be members of that denomination, and may lawfully bar from employment anyone who is not a member. Fire departments can require firemen to be able to lift a given weight to demonstrate that they will be able to carry fire victims out of a burning building.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#142

Post by jazzyjackson »

onehedgehog wrote: post #46
jazzyjackson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

???? like what?

Is it hard to think of a single job posting that would only be available to only men OR women? Entertainment jobs are especially constrained: Exotic male dancer, exotic female dancer, specific roles in tv/movies/plays, Hooters waitress, etc.

OK you got me, exotic dancers didn't cross my mind xD

TBH it does seem a little discriminatory that a place gets to decide "all our waitresses are women", or "only women dance here", but I can see how industry's could be grandfathered in...

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#143

Post by PhasmaFelis »

busterarm wrote: post #102
bobthepanda wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is excluded though. A woman can buy Men's Health ; a man can buy Cosmopolitan . What Facebook is doing is enabling straight up exclusion of genders from advertising, which is completely different in the eyes of the law.

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…

> budgeted spend

Does that just mean "budget"?

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#144

Post by zeroname »

hyperpape wrote: post #93
reversecs wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if you said what you objected to specifically and describe or specify how the link you've commented adds anything to the discussion.

The idea that companies will be forced by the market to correct discrimination is a nice idea in theory, but false. I think it's obviously false, but the article will help someone who likes to question the obvious.

The whole "priced out of the market" idea is nonsense. That argument isn't even being made by Andreesen here though. The competitive disadvantage is true, by definition. It doesn't make sense to discriminate from a market perspective. The article only supports this: Greenspan got a competitive advantage by hiring women, because they were cheaper. The free market punishes discrimination. It doesn't end discrimination, but it gives an incentive for hiring women.

If I identified as a woman, I frankly wouldn't be so worried about earning a bit less than my male counterparts, but rather about not being hired at all, because of all the legal risks associated with hiring women because of anti-discrimination laws. Nobody is getting sued for discrimination about firing some white boy.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#145

Post by whoa_there_bud »

p1necone wrote: post #92
twblalock wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Facebook itself is engaging in illegal activity by publishing those ads! It is against the law to do that. If you commit a crime because somebody else asked you to do it, does that mean you didn’t break the law? If Facebook commits a crime because someone asked them to do it, does that mean they didn’t break the law? How could the answers to those two questions be different?

Does Facebook know that these are employment ads? Should they add a checkbox to their ad posting system so that the user can tell them that they are advertising for a product or a job posting? As another example - should Facebook be legally responsible if I use their service to send death threats to someone? If not, why is that case different?

Of course Facebook knows that they are running employment ads. They don't know _which_ ads are employment ads, because they are not paying anyone to look at the ILLEGAL advertisements they know that they are running.

"But having humans review ads doesn't scale!" says someone with a financial position in online advertising.

Meanwhile, the massive profits of the online advertising companies have forced them to 'pivot' into real estate holding companies, during a period of persistent underemployment and stagnant wage growth.

Yep. Nothing can be done. We have to wait for artificial intelligence to save the day. It would simply cut into profits too much to follow the law.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#146

Post by jmknoll »

Darmani wrote: post #140
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.

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?

I can kind of see what they're getting at. Women are under-represented in the tech industry. I don't think many people would disagree with that.

But this feels like a blunt instrument for a highly-nuanced issue. If diversity of experience is a core value at Duolingo, why not recruit everywhere and tailor the interviewing process to favor candidates from non-traditional backgrounds?

While they've achieved an important milestone, I'd be very worried about the line of thinking that led to this decision if I were a Duolingo investor. All the diversity in the world doesn't mean much if they can't find a way to keep the lights on.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#147

Post by dmoy »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #143
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…

> budgeted spend Does that just mean "budget"?

Specifically means the budget that will be spent on the ads, vs any kind of personnel, agency, etc cost. Budget alone would be more ambiguous.

At least that's my recollection, though I've been out of ads for like a couple years now.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#148

Post by lawnchair_larry »

What if employers create a different ad for men and for women, targeting both, but appealing to the target more effectively? It's often cited that the wording of a neutral sounding job ad can have a huge effect on the percentage of women that will apply.

There's nothing illegal about what facebook is doing, although there is potential for misuse.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#149

Post by jsonne »

Just as an FYI, in the past few hours there have been reports on some big Facebook advertising groups people are getting notifications about their anti-discrimination policies regarding jobs. As a matter of fact, they've, for a while, had an extra step for advertisers to verify they're in compliance for housing, lending, and career opportunities.

Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men

#150

Post by eridius »

Darmani wrote: post #140
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.

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?

Wow I have a lot more respect for Duolingo now. That's great!
Post reply on HN