Slashdot Mirror
HUD Files Complaint Alleging Facebook Ad Tools Allow Housing Discrimination (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has filed an official discrimination complaint against Facebook, saying the site's dizzying array of advertising tools makes it simple for advertisers to illegally exclude wide swathes of the population from seeing housing ads, Politico wrote on Friday. In a press release, HUD wrote that Facebook's "targeted advertising" model more or less constitutes a way for said advertisers to skirt the federal Fair Housing Act, specifically by excluding members of protected categories: "HUD claims Facebook enables advertisers to control which users receive housing-related ads based upon the recipient's race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, disability, and/or zip code. Facebook then invites advertisers to express unlawful preferences by offering discriminatory options, allowing them to effectively limit housing options for these protected classes under the guise of 'targeted advertising.'"
Specific examples cited by HUD included showing display ads "either only to men or women," as well as preventing users flagged as interested in disabilities-related topics like "assistance dog" or "accessibility" from seeing display ads. HUD also said that the targeted advertising tool can be used to prevent people interested in specific religions or regions from seeing ads, as well as "draw a red line around zip codes and then not display ads to Facebook users who live in specific zip codes." The complaint is just a complaint, but it does start an official process that will either end in Facebook reaching a resolution with federal officials or a lawsuit. CNN Tech notes that the National Fair Housing Alliance is simultaneously suing Facebook for the same reason. "Facebook is trying to dismiss the suit by claiming it has limited liability for user-generated content, though HUD and federal prosecutors claim the site operates as an internet content provider with respect to housing ads and therefore is subject to civil rights law," reports Gizmodo.
Specific examples cited by HUD included showing display ads "either only to men or women," as well as preventing users flagged as interested in disabilities-related topics like "assistance dog" or "accessibility" from seeing display ads. HUD also said that the targeted advertising tool can be used to prevent people interested in specific religions or regions from seeing ads, as well as "draw a red line around zip codes and then not display ads to Facebook users who live in specific zip codes." The complaint is just a complaint, but it does start an official process that will either end in Facebook reaching a resolution with federal officials or a lawsuit. CNN Tech notes that the National Fair Housing Alliance is simultaneously suing Facebook for the same reason. "Facebook is trying to dismiss the suit by claiming it has limited liability for user-generated content, though HUD and federal prosecutors claim the site operates as an internet content provider with respect to housing ads and therefore is subject to civil rights law," reports Gizmodo.
Wow, people have really got it in for Facebook lately. Every single advertiser lets you do this, internet or otherwise. That's why you don't see high end mansions for sale in lowborn magazines.
No that's not a good thing.
It is to trumptards, because although they are not ok with a black president using executive orders, they are fine with a child rapist president doing the same.
You can prevent a "facebook ad" from reaching certain groups - such as women or blacks or handicapped or whatever. But that is just the ad. They can show up and bid for the house anyway - because the information is available through other canals than facebook.
Also, traditional advertising has the same opportunities. Won't show an ad to women? Hang posters above urinals. Won't show an ad to blacks? Hang posters in those bars where KKK fans hang out. An ad the handicapped won't see? Put it in the middle of long staircases.
Nah, it'll just be a settlement like for Microsoft, Trump Enterprises, Halliburton, McDonald's or North Korea.
It is human nature and a personal goal to want to be able to have a say in what happens in your home, or your property. It is a societal goal to make sure that harmony and opportunity are available to people who live in a country.
Government is responsible for the 2nd goal, because people's individual desires tend to compete with societal desires. And frankly, government is failing in its job / losing ground in the fight for its purpose in this technology age. Either because our state / federal governments are paralyzed by anger from everyone in a post-boom economy, or that simply technology companies move too fast and are trying to displace the functions of government in its absence.
Either way, FB doesn't stand to lose too much. The order of magnitude of HUD fines for such behavior are in the tens of thousands of $. Petty cash. And FB will be fighting it the entire way.
Contest sites have to be careful who they hand a million dollars to...
Gun sites need to follow 51 sets of laws (federal plus 50 states)...
Radio streams have to obey local rules on products and prices....
Google has to target people who will buy the product, they can't just randomly send ads around...
Facebook has to follow regulations on ads too... sorry, no exemptions to the laws about what you could advertise in the newspaper.
Um, HUD *IS* part of the Trump Administration.
Yes, this tool could be used to discriminate. But that's the point of the tool. If you are selling women's jeans it's perfectly legal to target a particular audience, i.e. women. Do they have any example of using this tool to illegally discriminate against a protected class? If so, file a lawsuit. Otherwise, stop speculating about what it could be used for.
rich white folk can't get into the projects? donwright shameful fickleface.
It's people like you who give the Democrats such a bad name.
You can buy any paper no matter your gender, skin color or even income. You can not exclude anyone that way. You can target demographics simply by the way you advertise, not just where you advertise, but you can not exclude anyone either. I hope you see the theme here. You can target, but you cannot exclude. Facebook allows you to exclude people.
Note that Facebook lets you opt out of targeting and nobody forces you to give correct demographic information. So, if you want to receive ads targeted to geriatric transgender Asian billionaire midgets, set up your profile accordingly and enjoy!
Those rules already exist. If you are an advertiser for covered subjects and you post ads only in places which are not reaching a diverse audience, you can get in trouble.
Which is why you take affirmative action and make sure your advertisements are reaching a broad audience.
You must have missed the past four or five decades of anti-discrimination law.
How could the democrat's name be any worse than the name of those who freely, willingly and knowingly put in the oval office a known chronically immature narcissist, pathological liar, con-man, scammer, crook with over 1300 civil lawsuits against him, sexual predator, child-agressor and psychopath ?
How anyone, democrat OR republican, possibly could have done any worse than this ? Do you really think any good and decent american will ever forgive you for what you did ? Do you really think your children and grandchildren will look upon you with anything else than contempt and disgust when they're old enough to understand the unspeakable act that you've committed ?
It's simply allowing advertisers to target advertisements and in the process that can be used to discriminate. It's up to each advertiser to comply with the law. It would probably get complicated to restrict advertisements and unreasonable for that matter in the manor HUD is demanding because it would not only impact advertisers who are discriminating, but it would also impact those who were simply advertising products designed for those in particular categories. Being disabled people, gay people, rich people, etc. And really- why should an advertiser be forced to pay for advertising across a city wide area if 1/3 of the city's population is poor and couldn't afford the house being advertised? All that does is increase costs and reduce efficiencies. And yea- I'm one of those "protected" minorities. If I think this is utter crap it probably is. We'd mostly all be better off getting rid of these government agencies and letting the free market do its thing. If your being discriminated against MOVE! I largely can't even get away from the discrimination entirely I suffer as the law discriminates against me-alongside societal discrimination nearly everywhere- but none-the-less even I was able to move some place that I'm much better off and have a support base of people who aren't total ass holes to me. But then again I moved to New Hampshire to be around like-minded principled libertarians (ie Garry Johnson isn't a libertarian and neither are basally the people outside of NH who claim to be- republicans in sheep clothing are not libertarians) who aren't all outright ass holes who judge one based on stupid shit and even the ones who grumble will still largely vote against violence- unless everywhere else- and that is what we really need to end discrimination. It's government discrimination that is the problem- not societal discrimination that is the real problem.
A law like this is authoritarian and wrong. Just because it's a law doesn't make it right.
You're more than welcome to articulate how the 1968 Fair Housing Act is wrong.
It actually made a finding as to how housing discrimination is wrong, you may want to examine that.
When your TDS goes so far that even when they(Trump various offices where he's appointed people) do the right thing, your mind conjures up something in order to reinforce that social and political viewpoint so you can feel smug.
What a fucking shitty way to live.
Om, nomnomnom...
Well, at least Trump did not (yet?) start any of the many wars Hillary had promised. That's a big plus in my book.
What wars did "Hillary promise?"
You peoples' ignorance is astounding.
Facebook is evil.
Why would the Trump Administration do that? After all, Facebook is currently attempting to design a system whereby they can silence Trump supporters.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
__FaceBook prediction #312__ By 2034, of the 41% of deceased profiles, 22% provide "click farm" jobs for 90.3 million children in developing nations, though any reliable approximation of deceased, but "vital", users will be known only to FB's legal department and a closely guarded trade secret. Thank Colossus for mrwireless' post. I am not surprised there are some on /. asserting on a public forum not to speculate about how proprietary *tools* are *utilized* by FaceBook's-feudal-warlord-culture designed to impress *Mr.* Zuckerberg. Keep it up, scuzzballs, and the government itself will be forced to hire watchers, and then watchers to watch the watchers (as socialist countries choose to do) because the abuses are worse every quarter.
For slashdot yutes: (1) Real ID accounts were a battle ending in a stale-mate ten years ago now, and (2) You're deluding yourself if you believe your casual comprehension of demographics, its methods and metrics, are greater than teams of corporate lawyers and quants all over the globe. What is a demographic? Begin with the Domesdary Book and don't stop looking over your shoulder, subject.
Would were! Should is! Could be! And live a hundred times three.
Personally I think this "discrimination" stuff has gone too far. People should be able to advertise to people who are not disabled (think sport related stuff) and people should be able to advertise to a specific race or language (think the latest season of a spanish soap opera) or they should be able to advertise to an age range (think about a barbara streisand movie) or to a specific sex (what about tampons and eye pencils). I think advertisers as whole need to address this with government so the platforms stop getting crap. But if you cant advertise a place where dogs are not allowed to people who dont have dogs, or where a lady cant look for a female room mate, or a spanish speaking only person cant look for a spanish person... seriously, your just costing those people money, the spanish person will just deny those who dont speak spanish, and the anti dog guy will tell the dog owner the place is taken. wasting both the advertisers time and money, and the respondees time and probably money. The more money advertisers have to spend (due to lack of targeting) the more the consumer has to pay.
Hillary was going to war against the Stars, against Clones, and Dragons.
Good to know you finally realized the child rapist Obama was.
What's your alternative? Land, air, and sea invasion?
The credit bureaus sell credit scores by zip code. Other companies sell subscription information. In the days of spam snail mail advertising companies did this kind of thing all the time. Want a new credit card or a loan, well unless you lived in the right place you wouldn't know about the best deals.
I own the properties and I get to decide who lives in them. I shouldn't have to waste my time coming up with BS reasons for turning down your application after you waste my time hauling your 9 kids and 3 inlaws through my 4 bedroom on the 2nd floor. Just let me advertise to the clients I want that arent going to stink up my rental with curry powder. You know, just like the landlords that only advertise in Hindi in their local community pages only rent to the packs of their relatives they manage to squeeze into the country. Stop trying to change the rules of the game just because you're losing. My land, my choice, fuck off.
109.25 Selective use of advertising media or content.
The selective use of advertising media or content when particular combinations thereof are used exclusively with respect to various housing developments or sites can lead to discriminatory advertising in violation of this part.
I'm also worried about the people being kicked out of their rented home by HOAs or municipal councils because they didn't mow the lawn 'on time' or were raped. The first is political-correctness gone mad, the second, council refusing to provide the services that taxpayers need.
If I'm interested in seeing eye dogs, I might not necessarily be blind.
I could be a dog trainer, or an animal lover interested in the topic. I know a lot of people like this.
Being interested in Islam or Buddhism doesn't necessarily make me either thing, and liking rap music doesn't really say anything about my ethnicity. Although, they might have a point on the zip codes.
Time will tell.
This signature has Super Cow Powers