6 ms·

If you mainly advertised for employees in certain newspapers you'd get people of a given political leaning. If you advertised on the radio at 6 in the morning y

by avar 9y ago

If you mainly advertised for employees in certain newspapers you'd get people of a given political leaning. If you advertised on the radio at 6 in the morning you probably wouldn't get anyone under 35. It's not obvious to me why employers should be able to use the implicit filtering traditional media provides, but not the explicit filtering new advertising platforms provide.

eanzenberg 9y ago
Probably because the filtering is too powerful and accurate? Anyone can get up at 6am to listen to the radio. If you don't show certain people job ads they may never see or know about the listing.
- chronic193 9y ago
  > Anyone can get up at 6am to listen to the radio. Anyone could lie about their likes/interests or even age on Facebook. What's your point?
- avar 9y ago
  Anyone can create multiple Facebook profiles of various ages and look at job advertisements, which is both cheaper than subscribing to a bunch of newspapers, and less of a hassle than having to get up at 6 am (in the days before people could easily record the radio).
  - paulie_a 9y ago
    Isn't that against tos and potentially a cfaa violation? You are interfering with their platforms ad targeting.
  - rcthompson 9y ago
    Age isn't the only filtering criterion, though. Do I need to create a fake account for every combination of age, gender, read, socioeconomic status, etc. if I want to look at all the job ads?
    - rcthompson 9y ago
      (Oops, "read" was supposed to say "race".)
  - notzuck 9y ago
    Downvoted and rightly so. Do you think purchasing a few newspapers from the store in the morning is the same thing as having to register multiple accounts on FB just to avoid their age discrimination which you may not be aware is happening in the first place? This also violates their terms of service. How many accounts do I need: one white, one black, one hispanic, one 20 - 30, one 30 - 40?? where does it end? It's unethical developers like you that allows this kind of thing to happen.
    - avar 9y ago
      > Downvoted and rightly so. I don't care about the internet points, but I'd like to point out, account created ~30m ago, that you're using HN the wrong way. Downvoting is not a "I disagree" button like on Reddit, it's a "this is not interesting to discuss" button, the fact that you're replying at all shows that it's not the latter. > Do you think purchasing a few newspapers from[...] No it's certainly not the same, but it is interesting to think about how established precedence for the discretion of advertisers, given their limited money resources and the fact that they have to pick some audience will be applied to social media. > How many accounts do I need: one white, one black, one > hispanic, one 20 - 30, one 30 - 40?? where does it end? How many newspaper subscriptions do you need? What do those cost? I'm just pointing out that there's always been a pay-to-play element to job seeking. In some sense what FB is enabling is shitty, but on the other hand the fee to play has never been lower. > It's unethical developers like you that allows this > kind of thing to happen. I have zero relation to Facebook, and for what it's worth I wish it didn't exist, but if it didn't the next FB clone would just replace it.
      - learc83 9y ago
        >Downvoting is not a "I disagree" button like on Reddit You have it backwards. Everyone might not follow this rule, but reddiquette says "Please don't downvote an otherwise acceptable post because you don't personally like it." While pg thinks it's perfectly fine to use the downvote to express disagreement: "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 > the fact that you're replying at all shows that it's not the latter. By that logic you should never reply to someone you downvote.
tobtoh 9y ago
Using your examples, there is nothing stopping people from the opposite political leaning from reading that certain newspaper (and many people do read newspapers covering both sides). Same with 6am radio - there is nothing stopping under 35s listening (and indeed there will be many that do). With FB adverts, it is a complete 100% filter if you are outside the demographic range. You have no choice in the matter as to whether you see that material or not.
harry8 9y ago
If you can show they deliberately excluded demographics by choice of radio timeslots. Yeah, illegal. Why would facebook be different?
beager 9y ago
As analogs to the examples you give, advertisers could buy placement on Facebook during certain times of day, or on certain Pages. In those cases, demographic targeting is indirect but still effective. I have no insight or opinion on the ethical or legal considerations of targeting on demographic data directly, except to say that platforms should give you the option to conceal that data (and all data) from advertisers.
tmh79 9y ago
The problem is that if facebook decides that I am black, I will never be able to see facebook ads targeted towards white people, I will never know they exist, and even if I want to see them, I will be unable to, thus I am excluded from them. BUT if I am black, I am able to buy a magazine targeted towards white people, peruse the classified ads, and apply to any jobs that interest me. The other issue is that political leanings are not a protected class. The bar for protected classes is, rightfully, set pretty high, to things that are usually out of one's control (race, age, sexual orientation, gender, etc). I think its entirely fine to segment these ads based on things that aren't protected, the problem is using age which is protected.
- dizzystar 9y ago
  I've worked with racists that didn't want me around, I can assure you that you are better off without them. There's nothing heroic about forcing pigs out of their slop. Job ads drop a lot of blatant hints about race, age, gender, religion, and so on. Instead of me wasting my time applying to a job I can't get, I'd rather not see them. Of course, if you are the crusading type, then please go all the way and get the lawyers on the offending company.
  - slededit 9y ago
    Not everyone has the benefit of multiple potential jobs. Anti discrimination laws exist for those people.
- banku_brougham 9y ago
  This 1000x. I’m pretty frustrated by many of the posts here today, someone please post a github repo of “Understand the law in X minutes.” Specifically, it is so common to see evaluations of a reasonable hypothetical counter-example that holds together logically, with an implicit or explicit judgement of the outcome meant to discourage the reader from being too hasty in regarding this new outrage as such. There is no discussion of the reason such laws exist, or any appreciation of the gravity of breaking these laws, indeed little appreciation for what law is and how it is different from the most up-voted answer on stackoverflow. At a minimum, we should all have respect for the risk of legal jeopardy to ourselves in our professional work, as it is often not the executive or the corporate body that bears the punishment.
mulmen 9y ago
1) If I was interested in a job in that field I might subscribe to one of those newspapers to see job ads. 2) Newspaper subscribers are not a protected class. Job seekers over the age of 40 are.
egd 9y ago
In a way, this is similar to the argument the FBI made to assert that GPS trackers didn't constitute a search because they could just follow someone around and get the same data. The argument against that, and this, was that the technology is sufficiently more powerful and sufficiently out of step with people's expectations that it's a difference in category, not degree. (IANAL, if that's not obvious) The difference with the new systems is that, while I might happen to come across an ad in traditional media because I woke up early or I might happen to be reading a paper I normally don't, there's practically no chance whatsoever for me to accidentally see an ad in Facebook's systems that's not targeted at me. That's a categorically different situation because I'm being explicitly excluded from that content based on factors specified by the employer, not just by luck or personal preference. Also, the "implicit filtering" of traditional media only passes the bar because it can't actually be proven that the employer is filtering based on age, gender, etc., which isn't the case with an explicit filtering system. Yes, employers can still skirt the system with the traditional media targeting, but they're still illegally discriminating based on age or other factors.
walshemj 9y ago
And in places like NI not advertising jobs in both traditions papers can get you in trouble with the law and potentially serious Gentlemen with scary tats and who like paining folkloric paintings on gable ends from which ever side you pissed off.
lovich 9y ago
If a newspaper or radio put active barriers in place to prevent people from seeing things and they were grouped by protected classes, then yea they would be in the same boat. When Facebook decided that they we're going to pick and choose what content people could access, for their own benefit, then they picked up more liability than someone literally broadcasting to everyone in range
walshemj 9y ago
But people know what papers specialised in in the UK engineers take the Telegraph as that was where engineering jobs where (Thursday) likewise the Guardian on Wednesday for social work or actors taking the Stage or Variety

by avar 9y ago

eanzenberg 9y ago

Probably because the filtering is too powerful and accurate? Anyone can get up at 6am to listen to the radio. If you don't show certain people job ads they may never see or know about the listing.

chronic193 9y ago
> Anyone can get up at 6am to listen to the radio. Anyone could lie about their likes/interests or even age on Facebook. What's your point?
avar 9y ago
Anyone can create multiple Facebook profiles of various ages and look at job advertisements, which is both cheaper than subscribing to a bunch of newspapers, and less of a hassle than having to get up at 6 am (in the days before people could easily record the radio).
- paulie_a 9y ago
  Isn't that against tos and potentially a cfaa violation? You are interfering with their platforms ad targeting.
- rcthompson 9y ago
  Age isn't the only filtering criterion, though. Do I need to create a fake account for every combination of age, gender, read, socioeconomic status, etc. if I want to look at all the job ads?
  - rcthompson 9y ago
    (Oops, "read" was supposed to say "race".)
- notzuck 9y ago
  Downvoted and rightly so. Do you think purchasing a few newspapers from the store in the morning is the same thing as having to register multiple accounts on FB just to avoid their age discrimination which you may not be aware is happening in the first place? This also violates their terms of service. How many accounts do I need: one white, one black, one hispanic, one 20 - 30, one 30 - 40?? where does it end? It's unethical developers like you that allows this kind of thing to happen.
  - avar 9y ago
    > Downvoted and rightly so. I don't care about the internet points, but I'd like to point out, account created ~30m ago, that you're using HN the wrong way. Downvoting is not a "I disagree" button like on Reddit, it's a "this is not interesting to discuss" button, the fact that you're replying at all shows that it's not the latter. > Do you think purchasing a few newspapers from[...] No it's certainly not the same, but it is interesting to think about how established precedence for the discretion of advertisers, given their limited money resources and the fact that they have to pick some audience will be applied to social media. > How many accounts do I need: one white, one black, one > hispanic, one 20 - 30, one 30 - 40?? where does it end? How many newspaper subscriptions do you need? What do those cost? I'm just pointing out that there's always been a pay-to-play element to job seeking. In some sense what FB is enabling is shitty, but on the other hand the fee to play has never been lower. > It's unethical developers like you that allows this > kind of thing to happen. I have zero relation to Facebook, and for what it's worth I wish it didn't exist, but if it didn't the next FB clone would just replace it.
    - learc83 9y ago
      >Downvoting is not a "I disagree" button like on Reddit You have it backwards. Everyone might not follow this rule, but reddiquette says "Please don't downvote an otherwise acceptable post because you don't personally like it." While pg thinks it's perfectly fine to use the downvote to express disagreement: "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 > the fact that you're replying at all shows that it's not the latter. By that logic you should never reply to someone you downvote.

tobtoh 9y ago

Using your examples, there is nothing stopping people from the opposite political leaning from reading that certain newspaper (and many people do read newspapers covering both sides). Same with 6am radio - there is nothing stopping under 35s listening (and indeed there will be many that do). With FB adverts, it is a complete 100% filter if you are outside the demographic range. You have no choice in the matter as to whether you see that material or not.

harry8 9y ago

If you can show they deliberately excluded demographics by choice of radio timeslots. Yeah, illegal. Why would facebook be different?

beager 9y ago

As analogs to the examples you give, advertisers could buy placement on Facebook during certain times of day, or on certain Pages. In those cases, demographic targeting is indirect but still effective. I have no insight or opinion on the ethical or legal considerations of targeting on demographic data directly, except to say that platforms should give you the option to conceal that data (and all data) from advertisers.

tmh79 9y ago

The problem is that if facebook decides that I am black, I will never be able to see facebook ads targeted towards white people, I will never know they exist, and even if I want to see them, I will be unable to, thus I am excluded from them. BUT if I am black, I am able to buy a magazine targeted towards white people, peruse the classified ads, and apply to any jobs that interest me. The other issue is that political leanings are not a protected class. The bar for protected classes is, rightfully, set pretty high, to things that are usually out of one's control (race, age, sexual orientation, gender, etc). I think its entirely fine to segment these ads based on things that aren't protected, the problem is using age which is protected.

dizzystar 9y ago
I've worked with racists that didn't want me around, I can assure you that you are better off without them. There's nothing heroic about forcing pigs out of their slop. Job ads drop a lot of blatant hints about race, age, gender, religion, and so on. Instead of me wasting my time applying to a job I can't get, I'd rather not see them. Of course, if you are the crusading type, then please go all the way and get the lawyers on the offending company.
- slededit 9y ago
  Not everyone has the benefit of multiple potential jobs. Anti discrimination laws exist for those people.
banku_brougham 9y ago
This 1000x. I’m pretty frustrated by many of the posts here today, someone please post a github repo of “Understand the law in X minutes.” Specifically, it is so common to see evaluations of a reasonable hypothetical counter-example that holds together logically, with an implicit or explicit judgement of the outcome meant to discourage the reader from being too hasty in regarding this new outrage as such. There is no discussion of the reason such laws exist, or any appreciation of the gravity of breaking these laws, indeed little appreciation for what law is and how it is different from the most up-voted answer on stackoverflow. At a minimum, we should all have respect for the risk of legal jeopardy to ourselves in our professional work, as it is often not the executive or the corporate body that bears the punishment.

mulmen 9y ago

1) If I was interested in a job in that field I might subscribe to one of those newspapers to see job ads. 2) Newspaper subscribers are not a protected class. Job seekers over the age of 40 are.

egd 9y ago

In a way, this is similar to the argument the FBI made to assert that GPS trackers didn't constitute a search because they could just follow someone around and get the same data. The argument against that, and this, was that the technology is sufficiently more powerful and sufficiently out of step with people's expectations that it's a difference in category, not degree. (IANAL, if that's not obvious) The difference with the new systems is that, while I might happen to come across an ad in traditional media because I woke up early or I might happen to be reading a paper I normally don't, there's practically no chance whatsoever for me to accidentally see an ad in Facebook's systems that's not targeted at me. That's a categorically different situation because I'm being explicitly excluded from that content based on factors specified by the employer, not just by luck or personal preference. Also, the "implicit filtering" of traditional media only passes the bar because it can't actually be proven that the employer is filtering based on age, gender, etc., which isn't the case with an explicit filtering system. Yes, employers can still skirt the system with the traditional media targeting, but they're still illegally discriminating based on age or other factors.

walshemj 9y ago

And in places like NI not advertising jobs in both traditions papers can get you in trouble with the law and potentially serious Gentlemen with scary tats and who like paining folkloric paintings on gable ends from which ever side you pissed off.

lovich 9y ago

If a newspaper or radio put active barriers in place to prevent people from seeing things and they were grouped by protected classes, then yea they would be in the same boat. When Facebook decided that they we're going to pick and choose what content people could access, for their own benefit, then they picked up more liability than someone literally broadcasting to everyone in range

walshemj 9y ago

But people know what papers specialised in in the UK engineers take the Telegraph as that was where engineering jobs where (Thursday) likewise the Guardian on Wednesday for social work or actors taking the Stage or Variety