5 ms·

The disturbing Facebook scandal we're all ignoring

32 points by saadmalik01 10y ago

voltagex_ 10y ago
Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers-exclude-users-by-race https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers... Does this article add anything new?
- schandur 10y ago
  The Business Insider article is sourced from http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/01/Disturbing-Facebook-Scandal-We-re-All-Ignoring http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/01/Disturbing-... And to answer your question, no, other than using a click-baity title.
nyolfen 10y ago
I recognize it's the principle of the thing, but I have to admit I'm not sure I could get worked up about being excluded from seeing advertisements
- snomad 10y ago
  X different rates / teasers / bonuses could be offered based on ethnicity.
an_account 10y ago
It's on the person running the ad to not break laws or operate in discriminatory ways, not Facebook. There are tons of metrics that correlate heavily with race, combinations of which that can be used in place of this metric. Facebook shouldn't be at fault when an advertiser abuses them. If a landlord took online rental applications, the company providing the technology for the applications wouldn't be at fault if the landlord denied all applications from a certain ethnicity.
- 1024core 10y ago
  You know, I'm sick and tired of all these "Web 2.0" companies shirking their responsibilities. Uber doesn't "offer rides", it's just a "marketplace". AirBnB doesn't offer short-term rentals, it's just a "marketplace". Face it: Facebook offers the option to exclude people based on race. This is wrong. Period. Race is one of the protected categories, and you cannot discriminate (or give preferential treatment to) based just on race.
  - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
    Does this extend to all ad targeting in general? For example, targeted advertiseing for tampons, African hair products, Spanish language stuff etc.
- jondubois 10y ago
  I think that it's a really dangerous trend; now we have all these platforms which facilitate illegal activity but which offload all the legal responsibility onto their users. You could say the same thing about Pirate Bay, Silk Road, Uber (for helping its drivers bypass local license requirements), AirBnb (for helping landlords bypass local tenancy laws). All these companies help people break the law... The ones which help people break 'important' laws are prosecuted (E.g. Silk Road and Pirate Bay) - But the ones which help people break minor laws tend to be left alone mostly. Our society is evolving in such a way that our laws are slowly degrading - Particularly the laws designed to protect the working classes. What all these companies are doing is effectively turning us all against each other for their own benefit.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    Our society is evolving in such a way that our laws are slowly degrading... This may be an inevitable response to the ongoing proliferation of unnecessary laws?
    - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
      Maybe one could raise VC money at a ridiculous valuation to distribute cocaine using the airbnb/uber model...
rm999 10y ago
I'm surprised the recent news about how Trump's campaign is using facebook to depress black voting wasn't mentioned. >The animation will be delivered to certain African American voters through Facebook “dark posts” — nonpublic posts whose viewership the campaign controls so that, as Parscale puts it, “only the people we want to see it, see it.” The aim is to depress Clinton’s vote total. “We know because we’ve modeled this,” says the official. “It will dramatically affect her ability to turn these people out.” Highly targeted negative political advertising is the norm, but when the digital director for a campaign is openly using the ethnicity option in facebook to "affect her ability to turn these people out", it feels wrong. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the-trump-bunker-with-12-days-to-go http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the...
- jessaustin 10y ago
  TFA: If the ad were selling a house or recruiting for a job fair, it would almost certainly be illegal. We have laws about that stuff, for good reason. They don't address political speech, however, and probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster if they did. This is the sort of tawdry viciousness we've come to expect from Trump, but it's solidly within the "marketplace of ideas". The only way to respond to this is with opposing targeted ads.
omonra 10y ago
How is this different from advertisers selecting the age bracket or gender they want to target? I'm not sure why this is any more illegal.
soulashell 10y ago
Don't advertisers target ethnicities by, for example, choosing which TV network to use for an ad campaign?

32 points by saadmalik01 10y ago

Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers-exclude-users-by-race https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers... Does this article add anything new?

schandur 10y ago
The Business Insider article is sourced from http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/01/Disturbing-Facebook-Scandal-We-re-All-Ignoring http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/11/01/Disturbing-... And to answer your question, no, other than using a click-baity title.

nyolfen 10y ago

I recognize it's the principle of the thing, but I have to admit I'm not sure I could get worked up about being excluded from seeing advertisements

snomad 10y ago
X different rates / teasers / bonuses could be offered based on ethnicity.

an_account 10y ago

It's on the person running the ad to not break laws or operate in discriminatory ways, not Facebook. There are tons of metrics that correlate heavily with race, combinations of which that can be used in place of this metric. Facebook shouldn't be at fault when an advertiser abuses them. If a landlord took online rental applications, the company providing the technology for the applications wouldn't be at fault if the landlord denied all applications from a certain ethnicity.

1024core 10y ago
You know, I'm sick and tired of all these "Web 2.0" companies shirking their responsibilities. Uber doesn't "offer rides", it's just a "marketplace". AirBnB doesn't offer short-term rentals, it's just a "marketplace". Face it: Facebook offers the option to exclude people based on race. This is wrong. Period. Race is one of the protected categories, and you cannot discriminate (or give preferential treatment to) based just on race.
- xkcd-sucks 10y ago
  Does this extend to all ad targeting in general? For example, targeted advertiseing for tampons, African hair products, Spanish language stuff etc.
jondubois 10y ago
I think that it's a really dangerous trend; now we have all these platforms which facilitate illegal activity but which offload all the legal responsibility onto their users. You could say the same thing about Pirate Bay, Silk Road, Uber (for helping its drivers bypass local license requirements), AirBnb (for helping landlords bypass local tenancy laws). All these companies help people break the law... The ones which help people break 'important' laws are prosecuted (E.g. Silk Road and Pirate Bay) - But the ones which help people break minor laws tend to be left alone mostly. Our society is evolving in such a way that our laws are slowly degrading - Particularly the laws designed to protect the working classes. What all these companies are doing is effectively turning us all against each other for their own benefit.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Our society is evolving in such a way that our laws are slowly degrading... This may be an inevitable response to the ongoing proliferation of unnecessary laws?
  - xkcd-sucks 10y ago
    Maybe one could raise VC money at a ridiculous valuation to distribute cocaine using the airbnb/uber model...

rm999 10y ago

I'm surprised the recent news about how Trump's campaign is using facebook to depress black voting wasn't mentioned. >The animation will be delivered to certain African American voters through Facebook “dark posts” — nonpublic posts whose viewership the campaign controls so that, as Parscale puts it, “only the people we want to see it, see it.” The aim is to depress Clinton’s vote total. “We know because we’ve modeled this,” says the official. “It will dramatically affect her ability to turn these people out.” Highly targeted negative political advertising is the norm, but when the digital director for a campaign is openly using the ethnicity option in facebook to "affect her ability to turn these people out", it feels wrong. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the-trump-bunker-with-12-days-to-go http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the...

jessaustin 10y ago
TFA: If the ad were selling a house or recruiting for a job fair, it would almost certainly be illegal. We have laws about that stuff, for good reason. They don't address political speech, however, and probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster if they did. This is the sort of tawdry viciousness we've come to expect from Trump, but it's solidly within the "marketplace of ideas". The only way to respond to this is with opposing targeted ads.

omonra 10y ago

How is this different from advertisers selecting the age bracket or gender they want to target? I'm not sure why this is any more illegal.

soulashell 10y ago

Don't advertisers target ethnicities by, for example, choosing which TV network to use for an ad campaign?