If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ProPublica)   One Year Ago: Facebook promises to stop letting advertisers discriminate on basis of race. Now: Facebook still lets advertisers discriminate based on race   ( propublica.org) divider line
    More: Followup, Racism, Facebook, Discrimination, Fair housing, Civil Rights Act of 1968, Race, Facebook ad, Facebook advertisers  
•       •       •

723 clicks; posted to Business » on 22 Nov 2017 at 12:02 AM (30 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



38 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-11-21 08:40:04 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


I can't imagine why they would do something like that?
 
2017-11-21 09:15:53 PM  
There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.
 
2017-11-21 10:04:46 PM  
I'm sure Ben Carson will get right on that just as soon as someone wakes him up.
 
2017-11-21 10:24:09 PM  

doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.



Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.
 
2017-11-21 10:56:21 PM  
phrawgh:

Just because it's good business doesn't mean it's not also racist.

Advertisers are not good people.
 
2017-11-21 11:22:53 PM  

Giant Clown Shoe: [img.fark.net image 320x180][View Full Size image _x_]
I can't imagine why they would do something like that?


img.fark.netView Full Size


Charts and graphs, yay!
 
2017-11-21 11:54:09 PM  

phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.


I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.
 
2017-11-22 12:02:16 AM  

phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.


Yes, but we are talking about housing here.
 
2017-11-22 12:12:40 AM  

wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.


Mr. Trump might have some properties he'd like to advertise.
 
2017-11-22 12:24:57 AM  

phrawgh: wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.

Mr. Trump might have some properties he'd like to advertise.


only to the "right" people though.
 
2017-11-22 12:39:24 AM  

wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.


Some of the ads seem like they should have been blocked by Facebook. However, this:

"We also tested whether it was possible to use geography as a way to target racial groups - a practice known as redlining."

...doesn't really make sense to me. How is Facebook going to prevent people from choosing geographical areas to target?
 
2017-11-22 01:04:10 AM  

wejash: I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.


I'm not sure. I think it's probably a little trickier than that. It is difficult to regulate the subtle form of housing discrimination based on targeted advertising. If I want to place my penthouse offering in Architectural Digest, do I also have to place the same ad in Ebony?

If the answer is "no," which I think it must be, then can't Facebook get around it by changing the "multi-cultural" selector to a magazine selector, i.e.:

Include those whose magazine preferences include:

Architectural Digest
National Review

Exclude those whose magazine preferences include:

Jet
Ebony
Essence

What do you think? Would that still violate the fair housing guidelines?
 
2017-11-22 01:06:08 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.

Some of the ads seem like they should have been blocked by Facebook. However, this:

"We also tested whether it was possible to use geography as a way to target racial groups - a practice known as redlining."

...doesn't really make sense to me. How is Facebook going to prevent people from choosing geographical areas to target?


Redlining is institutionalized. It's oftentimes built within the system itself.
 
2017-11-22 01:14:14 AM  

doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


And heck, on that note I'd assume some people would be triggered by color blind recommendations
 
2017-11-22 01:16:04 AM  
So there's no deluxe apartment in the Sky?
 
2017-11-22 01:18:47 AM  

tomasso: wejash: I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.

I'm not sure. I think it's probably a little trickier than that. It is difficult to regulate the subtle form of housing discrimination based on targeted advertising. If I want to place my penthouse offering in Architectural Digest, do I also have to place the same ad in Ebony?

If the answer is "no," which I think it must be, then can't Facebook get around it by changing the "multi-cultural" selector to a magazine selector, i.e.:

Include those whose magazine preferences include:

Architectural Digest
National Review

Exclude those whose magazine preferences include:

Jet
Ebony
Essence

What do you think? Would that still violate the fair housing guidelines?



What about people with magazine preferences include members of both groups? Would they be included in your targeted advertisements? Or would they be excluded?

And what other parameters would your targeted advertising have?
 
2017-11-22 01:24:41 AM  

Fano: So there's no deluxe apartment in the Sky?


The pie is exactly like the cake in its truth value.
 
2017-11-22 02:07:14 AM  

Fano: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.

And heck, on that note I'd assume some people would be triggered by color blind recommendations


i3.cpcache.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-22 02:07:30 AM  

King Something: What about people with magazine preferences include members of both groups? Would they be included in your targeted advertisements? Or would they be excluded?

And what other parameters would your targeted advertising have?


None:

I would not flagrantly exclude minority readers of Architectural Digest and National Review, and I would not flagrantly try to include white readers of Ebony. I would just be finding a more subtle way to discriminate, but would be accomplishing the same thing, except with "acceptably" imperfect results. I think it would probably be perfectly legal if Facebook did it that way.

Maybe.
 
2017-11-22 02:28:58 AM  
I've been watching episodes of The Nanny on Logo, and the advertising shows an interesting skew. There are commercials about scar reducing creams and deep vein thrombosis preventing drugs. Two subjects that apply towards a population that undergoes... unusual levels of surgical procedures.
 
2017-11-22 03:17:15 AM  
#6 from White Privilege: Unpacking the White Napsack: "I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented."

Doesn't Facebook's advertising platform allow this to be fixed?
 
2017-11-22 04:02:28 AM  
If this is allowed, imagine the nightmarish world that could result, where black people and jews were unable to see ads on the internet.

Just imagine the horror of going to a website, and NOT SEEING ADS.  I shudder to think of it.
 
2017-11-22 06:44:50 AM  

fusillade762: I'm sure Ben Carson will get right on that just as soon as someone wakes him up.


Ben Carson? I thought Jared was in charge of internet commerce and race relations in America.
 
2017-11-22 06:56:18 AM  

tomasso: King Something: What about people with magazine preferences include members of both groups? Would they be included in your targeted advertisements? Or would they be excluded?

And what other parameters would your targeted advertising have?

None:

I would not flagrantly exclude minority readers of Architectural Digest and National Review, and I would not flagrantly try to include white readers of Ebony. I would just be finding a more subtle way to discriminate, but would be accomplishing the same thing, except with "acceptably" imperfect results. I think it would probably be perfectly legal if Facebook did it that way.

Maybe.


I doubt that a court would see it that way. They're not stupid.
 
2017-11-22 08:43:31 AM  
So during this year how many times has that actually happened?  Still zero?  OK then, carry on.
 
2017-11-22 08:47:15 AM  

tomasso: I would not flagrantly exclude minority readers of Architectural Digest and National Review, and I would not flagrantly try to include white readers of Ebony. I would just be finding a more subtle way to discriminate, but would be accomplishing the same thing, except with "acceptably" imperfect results. I think it would probably be perfectly legal if Facebook did it that way.

Maybe.


That's actually how Facebook determines race.  They don't ask you.  But apparently it's very accurate once they have a certain number of data points.
 
2017-11-22 08:58:36 AM  

BMFPitt: That's actually how Facebook determines race.  They don't ask you.  But apparently it's very accurate once they have a certain number of data points.


Not according to the article.

The authors were able to place an ad, and in the selection process, chose this:

Exclude people who match at least one of the following:

Demographics > Ethnic affinity

African American
Asian American
Hispanic - Spanish dominant

In recent weeks, the only change is that the "Ethnic affinity" category has been renamed "Multicultural affinity"
 
2017-11-22 09:31:39 AM  

tomasso: Not according to the article.

The authors were able to place an ad, and in the selection process, chose this:


So you agree that they were almost certainly the first ones to do that since the last article?
 
2017-11-22 09:41:08 AM  
 
2017-11-22 10:05:28 AM  
It's almost like Facebook and Zuckerberg are completely immoral whores who will take anyone's money in exchange for anything.  Nothing is beneath them if the check clears.
 
2017-11-22 10:33:08 AM  

tomasso: King Something: What about people with magazine preferences include members of both groups? Would they be included in your targeted advertisements? Or would they be excluded?

And what other parameters would your targeted advertising have?

None:

I would not flagrantly exclude minority readers of Architectural Digest and National Review, and I would not flagrantly try to include white readers of Ebony. I would just be finding a more subtle way to discriminate, but would be accomplishing the same thing, except with "acceptably" imperfect results. I think it would probably be perfectly legal if Facebook did it that way.

Maybe.


It's not Facebook that's directly trying to illegally target housing ads based on religion, familial status, race, language, ethnicity, disability status, or national origin. They're just not doing the very basics to block people from posting those discriminating ads to their site, which is required by law.

Yeah, if some super racist wants to block out black people they can probably try to game through the system. But right now, they're being really, really blatant.
 
2017-11-22 10:55:29 AM  

Kirablue42: itcamefromschenectady: wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.

Some of the ads seem like they should have been blocked by Facebook. However, this:

"We also tested whether it was possible to use geography as a way to target racial groups - a practice known as redlining."

...doesn't really make sense to me. How is Facebook going to prevent people from choosing geographical areas to target?

Redlining is institutionalized. It's oftentimes built within the system itself.

 I feel like you're just stringing words together that don't have any relevance. The example is selecting zip codes based on demographic information the advertiser has from the US Census. If Facebook allows the selection of a list of zip codes, demographics of those codes can be obtained independently. And the implication I got from the article is that it was.
 
2017-11-22 11:54:17 AM  

doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


And what does cosmetics have to do with housing?

Nothing, asshole.
 
2017-11-22 11:55:10 AM  

phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.


When it comes to housing, it's not demographics, it's racist.
 
2017-11-22 01:07:51 PM  

mcmnky: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

When it comes to housing, it's not demographics, it's racist.


Stipulating that redlining is racist and illegal, how can Facebook prevent ads from discriminating if advertisers get the demographic info from an independent source? As long as Facebook allows a list of zip codes to target, it doesn't matter if they provide demographic information or not. Do they develop an algorithm that allows some lists of zip codes and not others?
 
2017-11-22 02:26:04 PM  
If TV channels could similarly target ads so I don't get incontinence pads and diabetes meds advertisements on the shows I watch that would be great.  It's like an endless ocean of mysterious blue liquid every time the commercial break comes on.  I'm not an old lady, but apparently the TV thinks I am.
 
2017-11-22 06:31:13 PM  
It's called targeted marketing you morons.  Targeting people of a certain age isn't ageist and targeting men instead of women (or vice versa) isn't sexist.  Yet another fake controversy for clicks.
 
2017-11-23 12:36:34 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: wejash: phrawgh: doglover: There are some physiological differences that are race specific.

Cosmetics, for example, are very dependent on your natural skin color.

And it's not like advertisers are known for their ethics.


Why would BET or JET magazines want to waste advertising dollars showing ads to 45 year old white males in South Carolina? Why would SHOTGUN NEWS want to pay for ads targeting 68 black women in Yonkers?

This isn't racist. It's simple demographics.

I realize reading the article is a no-no here but since it was referring to ad limitations in rental or sale of housing barred by, you know, The Law...it is not the same thing. At all.

Some of the ads seem like they should have been blocked by Facebook. However, this:

"We also tested whether it was possible to use geography as a way to target racial groups - a practice known as redlining."

...doesn't really make sense to me. How is Facebook going to prevent people from choosing geographical areas to target?


By forbidding any geographic targeting restrictions in housing ads, letting only potential renters-buyers choose the geographic area to search.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report