Slashdot Mirror
Housing Department Slaps Facebook With Discrimination Charge (npr.org)
The Department of Housing and Urban Development is suing social media giant Facebook for allegedly violating the Fair Housing Act. From a report: HUD says Facebook does so by "encouraging, enabling and causing housing discrimination" when it allows companies that use their platform to improperly shield who can see certain housing ads. In the charging document, HUD accuses Facebook of unlawfully discriminating against people based on race, religion, familial status, disability and other characteristics that closely align with the 1968 Fair House Act's protected classes.
HUD also alleges Facebook allowed advertisers certain tools on their advertising platform that could exclude people who were classified as "non-American-born," "non-Christian" or "interested in Hispanic culture," among other things. It also said advertisers could exclude people based on ZIP code, essentially "drawing a red line around those neighborhoods on a map." "Facebook is discriminating against people based upon who they are and where they live," HUD Secretary Ben Carson said in a statement. "Using a computer to limit a person's housing choices can be just as discriminatory as slamming a door in someone's face."
HUD also alleges Facebook allowed advertisers certain tools on their advertising platform that could exclude people who were classified as "non-American-born," "non-Christian" or "interested in Hispanic culture," among other things. It also said advertisers could exclude people based on ZIP code, essentially "drawing a red line around those neighborhoods on a map." "Facebook is discriminating against people based upon who they are and where they live," HUD Secretary Ben Carson said in a statement. "Using a computer to limit a person's housing choices can be just as discriminatory as slamming a door in someone's face."
If someone misuses the advertising tools on a platform to break the law, wouldn't that person/company be responsible for breaking the law?
Yes, the advertiser is responsible. But the publisher is ALSO responsible, and this is not an "on the internet" thing. Newspapers have been held responsible for publishing illegal ads.
Why would facebook be liable for having a wide range of advertising options available to people selling an enormous range of things, in which housing is a tiny percentage.
There are specific laws about discrimination in housing, employment, and lending. The targeting that Facebook allows for other ads should not be allowed for these.
This is akin to going after google because someone sent a hate email from gmail.
No it isn't. First, sending hate mail is not illegal, while housing discrimination is. Second, Google is not providing a mechanism to specifically target hate mail at designated groups. Yet that is what Facebook is doing.
The people who place the discriminating ads are the ones who should be sued, not the advertising platform.
Actually, they should both be sued. From the charges themselves:
1. It is unlawful to make unavailable or deny a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin or disability. 42 U.S.C. 3604(a), (f)(1); 24 C.F.R. 100.50(b)(1), (3); 24 C.F.R. 100.60(a); 24 C.F.R. 100.70(b); 24 C.F.R. 100.202(a).
2. It is unlawful to discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of the sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin or disability. 42 U.S.C. 3604(b), (f)(2); 24 C.F.R. 100.50(b)(2); 24 C.F.R. 100.65(a); 24 C.F.R. 100.70(b); 24 C.F.R. 100.202(b).
So, as expected, it's illegal to place the ads. But then it goes on with...
3. It is unlawful to make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published, any notice, statement, or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin or disability, or that indicates an intention to make such a distinction. 42 U.S.C. 3604(c); 24 C.F.R. 100.75(a), (b), (c)(1).
All of which is to say (and going back to your knife analogy), Facebook is no more allowed to publish illegal housing ads than a switchblade manufacturer is allowed to sell switchblades in my state. If someone with a switchblade goes on a murder spree, the manufacturer likely won't be on the hook for the murder, but they will be pursued for the crime of having sold an illegal weapon. Likewise, while Facebook isn't on the hook for the poster's crime, they are on the hook for their own crime of unlawfully printing a discriminatory ad.