This is a modern trend enforced by a public authority which might be lead opinionated. Is it acceptable to show ads of menstrual napkins or erection pills to specific genders or is it discrimination?
Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
141–150 of 156 posts
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think making targeted ads illegal is a great idea all by itself. It would kneecap the entire surveillance and data industry built around tracking people for f**g ads. The gov will still track you though, but that's a different nut to crack.
I wonder if this should also apply to more traditional areas. Say TV and magazines. So advertisers should not be able to choose which demographics they target via proxy. That is you should not be able to choose say magazine or tv slot based on demographics.
As it stands now, I am so appalled by how much and how deep the ad-funded tracking an surveillance system is that I'd want all of it, every bit, for all media everywhere, torn down. But realistically, there probably does exist a reasonable balance between demographic data collection and use, and personal privacy that would work. We are just so far from that currently that I find it hard to imagine what it would look like.
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let’s say you have group A and group B, both of which have suitable candidates for the job. The information about the job is available via pull (job boards) and push (ads) channels. A has access to both channels, B only to pull. In this case A has statistically higher chances to get that job than B, if they have no other differences. If B is already disadvantaged, this just increases the gap. Your question is, in thi…
It sounds like this is about going to a job board and just searching for the job you want. That's the big barrier we're discussing?
Ok, let me explain in simple words. No, you cannot reduce it to „just searching the job you want“. Information asymmetry means that:
1. not everyone is aware of all the opportunities available on the market, e.g. when skillset is matching different type of the job people have not considered
2. …or where to find them, because there are many job boards and not everything even lands on them
3. …or that they should look for them at certain moment of time
Push ads address all 3 problems, reaching e.g. those who are employed and not actively looking, but open to change. If a man gets that ad, but a woman not, it means that that man spent zero time to find that opportunity and woman may not even find it in active search. Effectively they pay different costs for getting a better job.
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sounds like this is about going to a job board and just searching for the job you want. That's the big barrier we're discussing?
Ok, let me explain in simple words. No, you cannot reduce it to „just searching the job you want“. Information asymmetry means that: 1. not everyone is aware of all the opportunities available on the market, e.g. when skillset is matching different type of the job people have not considered 2. …or where to find them, because there are many job boards and not everything even lands on them 3. …or that they should look…
It's not the complexity of the words that's causing the misunderstanding. It's getting down to ground truth about what the job searching experience is like for actual individuals that will be impacted by this legislation.
So the hypothesis is that there are jobs that people will pay money to advertise for but won't place on a free job board to be found by interested parties?
There also seems to be a hypothesis that someone will click on an ad for a job, even if they don't realize they have the skills for it, where they won't search for a job that they don't realize they don't have the skills for. Am I understanding?
Do we have any examples to demonstrate this? All seems like an incredibly weak argument. Like, who was harmed by this? There was somebody that was a woman that wanted to be a mechanic and she couldn't because she didn't get a Facebook ad for it? That's what we're talking about, right?
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Child labor, keeping women uneducated and many other practices were the norm across ancient history. Who are we to question the wisdom of our ancestors.
I'm not using ancient history to justify it. I'm saying it's been around longer than algorithmic advertising. The comment I'm replying to suggested that this was caused by algorithmic advertising, which is a non-sequitur.
It didn't even begin to suggest it was caused by algorithmic advertising.
What it suggested was people to actually learn something about the world around them. Because we literally have jobs that at one point started as diverse/female dominated and then marketed exclusively at males. For example, IT/programming.
Also, a lot of "traditional" roles don't need additional algorithmic biases to stay the same.
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, let me explain in simple words. No, you cannot reduce it to „just searching the job you want“. Information asymmetry means that: 1. not everyone is aware of all the opportunities available on the market, e.g. when skillset is matching different type of the job people have not considered 2. …or where to find them, because there are many job boards and not everything even lands on them 3. …or that they should look…
It's not the complexity of the words that's causing the misunderstanding. It's getting down to ground truth about what the job searching experience is like for actual individuals that will be impacted by this legislation. So the hypothesis is that there are jobs that people will pay money to advertise for but won't place on a free job board to be found by interested parties? There also seems to be a hypothesis that s…
I will have to repeat myself, because I already answered this above. The fact that paid ads for jobs exist is clear indication that „free job boards“ channel doesn’t perform well enough, so employers are ready to pay extra. Paid job ads market has not gone in first few months, it is sustainable, i.e. people continue to pay because they have satisfactory conversion. It’s already proven by market that pull+push performs better, otherwise push wouldn’t exist. If push has gender-based targeting, then it creates an advantage for a specific gender - and that’s it. I did suggest plausible mechanics of why push works, but we don’t really need to find concrete examples, neither it is possible: you cannot present things that didn’t happen. If someone didn’t see an opportunity because ads were not shown, this person is not aware of it and cannot complain.
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, people as a whole are obviously not "owed" jobs. Why would you be owed a job?
Yes, they are owed these jobs. But even if you reject that, the practical argument is that if we conduct society/civilization in a manner in which there are not enough jobs to go around, then they have no disincentive from burning it all down with the rest of us chained inside the building. This is the price of us building our civilization such that we left nothing for anyone to live without civilization... everyone…
So your argument is: people will get mad if we don't bequeath them employment. That's it?
What if they get mad because their wages aren't living wages? What then? Why shouldn't they be owed living wages or owed non-awful jobs?
Jobs do not grow on trees. They are not harvested from the ether. It is the responsibility of every individual to provide for their own needs. If that requires getting a job, so be it. But you can also create your own job(s). There is more than enough opportunity for every working age person to provide for the needs of others and get provision in return. That is what civilization should be ensuring, not pre-packaged "jobs".
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sub-thread isn't really about what is legal (or illegal) in Europe or any other jurisdiction. It is about what is right. When it comes to legality and enforcement though, it does seem highly inconsistent to enforce something like this, which isn't actually discrimination on its own (rather it could lead to discrimination), when at the same time orgs are very obviously participating in actual discrimination ("we'…
> This sub-thread isn't really about what is legal (or illegal) in Europe or any other jurisdiction. It is about what is right. My argument wasn’t about whether it’s legal or not. It’s discrimination, which is both illegal and wrong. > when at the same time orgs are very obviously participating in actual discrimination I don’t think so. Please provide evidence. Which orgs and where? In Germany all job postings explic…
You brought up Europe, so I assumed you were making a legal argument. Right and wrong isn't dependent on the region you are in, imo.
> In Germany all job postings explicitly say „(m/w/d)“
Great, and what is actually stopping someone from only hiring men, or only hiring women? Putting "m/w/d" in a job posting is performative nonsense. Jobs are not granted automatically when you interview, they are discretionary. It is trivially easy for someone with hiring authority to not hire a woman because they are a woman, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This sub-thread isn't really about what is legal (or illegal) in Europe or any other jurisdiction. It is about what is right. My argument wasn’t about whether it’s legal or not. It’s discrimination, which is both illegal and wrong. > when at the same time orgs are very obviously participating in actual discrimination I don’t think so. Please provide evidence. Which orgs and where? In Germany all job postings explic…
You brought up Europe, so I assumed you were making a legal argument. Right and wrong isn't dependent on the region you are in, imo. > In Germany all job postings explicitly say „(m/w/d)“ Great, and what is actually stopping someone from only hiring men, or only hiring women? Putting "m/w/d" in a job posting is performative nonsense. Jobs are not granted automatically when you interview, they are discretionary. It is…
Are you making an excuse for discrimination in ads by saying that discrimination exists on later stages?
Re: Facebook enables gender discrimination in job ads: European human rights body
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
You brought up Europe, so I assumed you were making a legal argument. Right and wrong isn't dependent on the region you are in, imo. > In Germany all job postings explicitly say „(m/w/d)“ Great, and what is actually stopping someone from only hiring men, or only hiring women? Putting "m/w/d" in a job posting is performative nonsense. Jobs are not granted automatically when you interview, they are discretionary. It is…
Are you making an excuse for discrimination in ads by saying that discrimination exists on later stages?
An excuse? Not really. I see no issue with discrimination in ads. Ads are not a public good / human right.