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

Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#51

Post by chmod775 »

sokoloff wrote: post #44
munk-a wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it'd just look like it looked in the 90's, there wouldn't be targeted advertising and everyone except the marketers would be happier.

If you take as a given that I’m going to see ads (as I do), I’d much prefer to see ads that are relevant and interesting or amusing to me.

So you're preferring the form of manipulation that works best on you?

I'd prefer not to be manipulated at all.

In fact I loathe the feeling of being manipulated so much that it extends to all but the least obnoxious brands that try to advertise to me.

I can't be the only one who is allergic to advertising that tries to appropriate things from my social groups or background to sell me their shitty mobile data plan, insurance, or phone.

The most recent example is some random phone company trying to sell me their data plan with some shitty pun on "cum laude" on posters at university. Ugh.

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#52

Post by ajross »

Excel_Wizard wrote: post #3

> Nevertheless, the composition of audiences can still tilt toward demographic groups such as men or younger workers, according to a study published today by researchers at Northeastern University and Upturn, a nonprofit group that focuses on digital inequities >One reason for the persistent bias is that Facebook’s modified algorithm appears to rely on proxy characteristics that correlate with age or gender, said Ala…

> facebook ad to hire for a bricklaying job

That's a straw man. The situation of concern is failing to advertise high value or high status products and opportunities to people who would be disadvantaged. So to stay with your analogy, if you have a job to hire a React developer (a job which is right around 90% male), but you don't show it to someone because their browsing history includes Pinterest but not Reddit, then you're discriminating. And that's a problem worth worrying about and trying to address. Likewise ads for vacation timeshares that go to Taylor Swift fans but not to Diddy afficionados.

Yes, it's possible that there may be some collateral damage in the bricklaying recruiting industry. And, sure, maybe that's something that needs some regulatory relief. But mostly I think you're just looking for an example here.

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#53

Post by LanceH »

cm2012 wrote: post #42

This is beyond stupid. What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory towards women because men are more likely to write those words.

The clear solution is for Facebook to find the people in the protected demographics and have them force joined into groups until they receive ads at a proper rate. If that isn't sufficient, Facebook can make posts on their behalf until they match with enough ads to bring everything back to parity.

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#54

Post by ajross »

cm2012 wrote: post #42

This is beyond stupid. What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory towards women because men are more likely to write those words.

> What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory

That is... not what they're saying. In fact the article doesn't claim to know the targetting mechanism at all (though it turns out that they found a way for some advertisements to circumvent the new restrictions on gender and race targetting). They're just claiming to have found ads that empirically are targetting demographics in ways that Facebook has already agreed not to.

The "I love programming" bit seems to be something you've invented.

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#56

Post by cm2012 »

ajross wrote: post #54
cm2012 wrote: post #42

This is beyond stupid. What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory towards women because men are more likely to write those words.

> What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory That is... not what they're saying. In fact the article doesn't claim to know the targetting mechanism at all (though it turns out that they found a way for some advertisements to circumvent the new restrictions on gender and race targetting). They're just claiming to have found ads that…

"Dolese’s ad, for example, could have reached a predominantly male audience because it featured a man, or because an interest in trucking acts as a proxy for maleness, or both. (A Dolese spokeswoman said the ad targeted categories “that would appeal to someone in this line of work.”) The settlement did not resolve the potential bias from proxies and ad content, but said Facebook would study the issue."

The "I love programming" bit is an example of the kind of proxy they're talking about. Something correlated with gender but not gender itself. The FB algorithm uses thousands of data points that might correlate in different ways. Saying that any of those variables that correlates with gender should be forbidden is crazy.

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#57

Post by ajross »

cm2012 wrote: post #56
ajross wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What they're saying is that even if you target people who write "I love programming" on their fb page, it's still discriminatory That is... not what they're saying. In fact the article doesn't claim to know the targetting mechanism at all (though it turns out that they found a way for some advertisements to circumvent the new restrictions on gender and race targetting). They're just claiming to have found ads that…

"Dolese’s ad, for example, could have reached a predominantly male audience because it featured a man, or because an interest in trucking acts as a proxy for maleness, or both. (A Dolese spokeswoman said the ad targeted categories “that would appeal to someone in this line of work.”) The settlement did not resolve the potential bias from proxies and ad content, but said Facebook would study the issue." The "I love pr…

> Saying that any of those variables that correlates with gender should be forbidden is crazy.

Once again, they are not saying that. You have applied a maximalist interpretation to the article that simply isn't present in the text.

The point of the article is that the end result is still discriminatory, something that Facebook had promised to fix. And they didn't fix it, and that's newsworthy.

Your point seems to be that solving the problem is really hard, so we shouldn't try to solve it, nor talk about whether or not it's being solved by parties who have promised to try to solve it?

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#58

Post by wahern »

stickfigure wrote: post #32

This is silly. By definition, if you're advertising on Facebook, you're selecting for a certain demographic. It's a bit broader than the AARP but by picking any medium you are discriminating against the people who don't follow that medium. It's also weird to say you shouldn't be able to target certain demographics. An ad that resonates well with seniors might resonate poorly with millennials. You might want to attrac…

I was curious about the source of Facebook's liability. It turns out their liability stems from the Fair Housing Act (FHA), 42 U.S. Code § 3604(c) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/3604) which has been repeatedly interpreted over the years to apply to publishers directly.

Facebook has a duty to screen housing advertisements for discriminatory indications or intent. The question of whether this sort of disparate impact discrimination meets the criteria for 3604(c) is a different matter. (My uninformed guess is that it does not, but Facebook is being attacked on all sides so will probably be judicious regarding when and how hard it pushes back.)

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#59

Post by throwaway1777 »

ajross wrote: post #52
Excel_Wizard wrote: post #3

> Nevertheless, the composition of audiences can still tilt toward demographic groups such as men or younger workers, according to a study published today by researchers at Northeastern University and Upturn, a nonprofit group that focuses on digital inequities >One reason for the persistent bias is that Facebook’s modified algorithm appears to rely on proxy characteristics that correlate with age or gender, said Ala…

> facebook ad to hire for a bricklaying job That's a straw man. The situation of concern is failing to advertise high value or high status products and opportunities to people who would be disadvantaged. So to stay with your analogy, if you have a job to hire a React developer (a job which is right around 90% male), but you don't show it to someone because their browsing history includes Pinterest but not Reddit, the…

Who's to say today's bricklaying job is tomorrow's "high status" coding job?

Re: Facebook Ads Can Still Discriminate, Despite a Civil Rights Settlement

#60

Post by Dylan16807 »

sandoooo wrote: post #41
currymj wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt that Lyndon Johnson was thinking about how much he hates men when he signed the Fair Housing Act into law.

and I really doubt the people pushing for this right now really cares what Johnson's original intents were. A sharp rock is a sharp rock.

The people pushing aren't doing it because they're against any types of tenants either. They want all types of tenants to be able to get housing and take advantage of things that make it easier.
Post reply on HN