Does this mean they are letting advertisers target only women too?
Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
321–330 of 407 posts
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if you spend the same amount of money but create separate ads targeted at men and women? What if you are trying to get more female engineers at your company, and want to target women?
Isn’t it discriminatory to have an intent to discriminate based on gender? “We want more at our company.” Unless gender is a bonafide qualification, that should be illegal just as “we want to hire more white people.”
Right, but let's go with the premise that you have an imbalance, and are trying to bring into balance. Then a gender or race targeted ad seems like a reasonable approach.
I guess my point is an targeted ad isn't evidence of intent to discriminate, and in fact can be a key component of pro-diversity actions.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#323At first i thought who cares, but then i saw 300+ comments.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
In fields that are dominated by women like teaching, they do target men for jobs. It is publicly known. There are only a handful of fields where women dominate.
> There are only a handful of fields where women dominate. I was curious if I could find some figures, so I did a quick Google search. While I can't vouch for the data used in this article, it seems your statement is incorrect, and quite strongly so https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/06/chart-the-perce... It draws data from the U.S. Department of Labor
Not entirely scientific, but the male majority roles took 18 "page ups" to scroll through versus 16 for the female majority roles.
A better approach would be to get the full counts of the positions, but that requires more work than the results are probably worth.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
well, in this case it isn't perfectly fine because it shouldn't be described as "Gender. Target ads to women, men or people of all genders." if there is only 50/50 chance to display ad to woman. Isn't it just ridiculous and straight lie to potential advertisement buyer?
Ad buyers are very sophisticated spenders and know the score. If they don't, they're going to get their money taken anyway and a lot more savagely than a mistargeted campaign hinged on gender. I really have to drive this point home. Selecting gender as a target on Facebook isn't actually selecting gender and everybody involved knows it. It's a much simpler way to describe a much more complex set of decisions.
What's confusing me here is that this is what you seem to be saying is happening:
1. Facebook knows my gender.
2. Facebook tell advertisers they will select/not select me based on my gender.
3. Facebook, despite knowing my gender, completely disregard that information and try and guess it with exceptionally poor results.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#326How do places like Tilted Kilt deal with basically only hiring "attractive" women legally?
No one's sued them yet. It's kind of like the affirmative action lawsuits, where it's a widespread topic but like only one person is actually pressing the issue in court.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#327Earlier 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…
Disparate Impact is one of the most illiberal policies in America. Companies need to be so careful that their results can't be construed as discriminatory that they need to go out of their way to make their hiring practices discriminatory. You could have a totally blind hiring process (remove names from resumes, modulate voices in phone interviews, never get any indication of race/sex/age of applicant) and still be l…
You see a similar thing with real estate in equal housing. I wasn't aware of how strict the standards were for this stuff until I took the license courses last year.
If you have a real estate office and somebody walks in, you might offer them a cup of coffee. If another person walks in later and you forget to offer it to them, and that person is part of a protected class...you've just violated equal housing.
This is why a lot of real estate offices will put out drinks, snacks and coffee with a "help yourself" sign now.
Well over half of the course was basically "how not to get sued."
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I'd expect Facebook to be better because they ask what your gender is and many people will have explicitly told them.
[deleted]
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I see both sides of the argument, as long as the advertiser pays per view, it seems wrong to require the listing to target demographics that are almost certainly uninterested. Your example of listing a job in Men's Health but not Cosmopolitan seems good. Technically not a perfect analogue as a woman always could buy Men's Health, but in practice very similar. Spinning off into a different angle, what if an adve…
"While I see both sides of the argument, as long as the advertiser pays per view, it seems wrong to require the listing to target demographics that are almost certainly uninterested." 1) Is making a little economy really more important than giving equal opportunity ? 2) What makes you think you, or the person that designed the ad, knows best what might women (or any other group that might be discriminated against wit…
If every person was the same on the average, then we would not have targeted advertising. Google/Facebook et al would not have invested millions (or billions?) of dollars in building a targeted ad network. The evidence is against you in terms of where people (both the seller and buyer) place their money.
Knowing what a type of person wants on the average is not discrimination.
Re: Facebook Is Letting Job Advertisers Target Only Men
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook needs to stop posting illegal ads, even if users request illegal ads. It's not my problem to decide how Facebook ensures that they obey the law -- it's their problem. Even if its really, really hard, it's still their problem. If it's impossible to achieve with technology, Facebook should leave the advertising business.
Balaclava sellers need to police bank robbery too. Too long they've gotten away with providing the means for these criminals. /s
The difference here is that Facebook owns their entire product experience. Everything on their site is under their control.