5 ms·

Job Ads You Can’t See on Facebook If You’re Older (2017)

70 points by kawera 8y ago

varenc 8y ago
I recently got a Facebook ad for a UC Berkeley coding boot camp that was explicitly targeting males 22-34. Fortunately Facebook gives you details on why you’re targeted for an ad. Screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpbeves1kf7bvkt/fb_ad.JPG?raw=1 https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpbeves1kf7bvkt/fb_ad.JPG?raw=1
- jeromegv 8y ago
  In that case, this isn't a job offer, nothing illegal.
  - throw_away 8y ago
    It would be illegal if it were UC Berkeley doing it for marketing their regular degree program, however: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/ageoverview.html?exp=1 https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/ageoverview.html?... But, I believe this is a UC extension thing, which I don't think is eligible for federal financial aid, so this rule does not apply.
dmoy 8y ago
So that could be damning, but without seeing the whole ad campaign it's hard to tell. If they have nearly identical ads with different age brackets running the gamut, I dunno if that's a problem. But boy does it look like a problem.
- save_ferris 8y ago
  What would be a legitimate use case to segment your ad targeting for recruiting purposes? Perhaps highlighting certain perks like paid maternity/paternity leave, but even that isn't usually highlighted in job ads (at least the ones I see.) Even if there are legitimate and pragmatic use cases for this, the likelihood of abuse seems high.
  - cm2012 8y ago
    Cost per click is going to be vastly lower, since young people look for jobs much more often. You'll get applicants at a third of the price.
  - flashman 8y ago
    Just spitballing, I'd tailor my messaging to women aged 30-45 to address our position on helping people return to the workforce, while for over-45s I'd talk about our open policy towards hiring older workers. For each, I'd probably choose photography that featured a representative individual. Yeah, I'm totally stereotyping the audience, but I'm also addressing common issues for jobseekers in those age groups. To be clear, I don't think that's what these companies are doing or they would have spoken up in their defence. And you also have to be careful that you express openness to, rather than preference for, a certain type of worker.
    - fjsolwmv 8y ago
      That's pretty much what Facebook said in it's rebuttal, linked in another comment.
  - matte_black 8y ago
    Campaign budgets are limited and you need to optimize your ads so they show up for demographics most likely to respond and be accepted.
vadym909 8y ago
It's an open secret in Silicon Valley that most tech companies prefer younger workers. Recruiters do what hiring managers ask for. Most hiring managers won't say it explicitly- they'll say things like 2-5 years experience from top schools or from the FANG companies with experience in modern technologies.
- fjsolwmv 8y ago
  It's not age discrimination to ask for relevant job skills and education.
  - vadym909 8y ago
    Exactly
  - daveFNbuck 8y ago
    How does putting a 2-5 year experience range filter for job skills or education better than saying 2 or more years? Someone with 6 years of experience doesn't have fewer job skills than someone in the 2-5 year range.
lph 8y ago
So who has standing to sue? How can I prove I /didn't/ see a job posting because I'm too old, and what damages could I claim as a result of it?
- frankydp 8y ago
  It would be difficult to sue for not being the recipient of an advertisement. While it may feel off it is most likely not illegal, because it is an ad and not part of the hiring process. In the same way that the big bech 4 host hackathons(ie recruiting events) at colleges and not retirement communities or really anywhere other than places where the highest population of the target demographic congregates.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    But old people can be at college. That's the material difference; campus police are not going around blocking old peoples' view of advertisements. To provide a counterpoint, you can't legally advertise the fact that there are no blacks in your housing development, however true that may be. In fact, there are many types of dogwhistling that are also banned when it comes to advertisement of housing.
  - flashman 8y ago
    > it is an ad and not part of the hiring process. If you were a qualified but rejected applicant, this ad targeting could demonstrate a pattern of behavior when you sued the employer for discrimination.
- paulddraper 8y ago
  There are no grounds to sue. In the US, companies cannot discriminate against 40+ ages for hiring. But that in no way applies to advertisement. If Facebook puts a job ad billboard in Seattle (mostly white), but not in Atlanta (mostly black), there's no illegal discrimination. And for good reason: Marketing is always about reaching the most likely targets.
  - developer2 8y ago
collatzeral 8y ago
FB has publicly defended this in the past. See https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/addressing-targeting-in-recruitment-ads/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/addressing-targeting-in-recru...
- fjsolwmv 8y ago
  Note: That post is a response to the OP, and a rather weak response saying it "may not in itself be discriminatory — just as it can be OK to run employment ads in magazines and on TV shows targeted at younger or older people" But propublica's article is also weak. Its Facebook examples are stuff like "ad targeted to ages 21-60"
blunte 8y ago
If they don't want me because of my age, I certainly don't want to work for them and provide my skills to them. Also, it's a bit sad that Verizon can't afford an editor or reviewer to tell them to use "you're" correctly... "Here, your more than just a number. Practice data story-telling, analytics, and more."
- mythrwy 8y ago
  Maybe it's a similar concept to the Nigerian prince scam emails purposefully containing misspellings. If you catch it and raise an eyebrow you aren't the mentality they are looking for.
  - blunte 8y ago
    Didn't know this was a thing, but it makes sense. Clever... evil, but clever.
cm2012 8y ago
This is because it's much cheaper to get completed applications (conversions) in a younger demo. Young people are more likely to be looking for jobs than older people, and thus click job ads more. [1] Higher click through rate means much lower cost per click. Based on the numbers in my stat link, you could likely net the same amount of new job applications spending $3000 on millennials as spending $9000 on other demos. This is a user friendly feature - younger people want to see these type of ads more by far. By the data, older people do not want to see these type of ads. Nothing to do with worker effectiveness or how HR treats older applicants. [1] " About 60% of Millennials are currently open to a new job opportunity and are by far the most likely generation to switch jobs. To support that, 21% of Millennials in 2016 reported switching jobs within the past year, compared to roughly 7% of gen Xers and other non-Millennials. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/22/millennia.. https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/22/millennia....
- peteretep 8y ago
  I was thinking much the same there, that it might simply be cheaper or be shown to be more effective to advertise to these groups, and perhaps there's no issue if they're not discriminating at the point of interview? That said, that may make sense but still be illegal.
- jetru 8y ago
  Those numbers you are quoting in [1] is BECAUSE of the bias.
mike_n 8y ago
instead of (perhaps illegally) recruiting for people of a certain age group, why not just search for people who liked (for example) Fortnite or Harry Potter or similar categories? Sure, you might get a few false positives (showing your ad to a few older people) or false negatives (missing some of the target group), but it probably works just fine and isn't technically age-oriented. The company could just say that it likes people who are into hobbies (eg - reading fantasy novels or mobile games).
wonderbear 8y ago
"18-35" I just realized how soon I'm going to be "older" for demographic purposes.
dang 8y ago
This had a huge discussion within the window of dupeage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15974603 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15974603
- kawera 8y ago
  Oh, sorry, I hadn't seen that story before.
  - dang 8y ago
    No worries!

70 points by kawera 8y ago

I recently got a Facebook ad for a UC Berkeley coding boot camp that was explicitly targeting males 22-34. Fortunately Facebook gives you details on why you’re targeted for an ad. Screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpbeves1kf7bvkt/fb_ad.JPG?raw=1 https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpbeves1kf7bvkt/fb_ad.JPG?raw=1

jeromegv 8y ago
In that case, this isn't a job offer, nothing illegal.
- throw_away 8y ago
  It would be illegal if it were UC Berkeley doing it for marketing their regular degree program, however: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/ageoverview.html?exp=1 https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/ageoverview.html?... But, I believe this is a UC extension thing, which I don't think is eligible for federal financial aid, so this rule does not apply.

dmoy 8y ago

So that could be damning, but without seeing the whole ad campaign it's hard to tell. If they have nearly identical ads with different age brackets running the gamut, I dunno if that's a problem. But boy does it look like a problem.

save_ferris 8y ago
What would be a legitimate use case to segment your ad targeting for recruiting purposes? Perhaps highlighting certain perks like paid maternity/paternity leave, but even that isn't usually highlighted in job ads (at least the ones I see.) Even if there are legitimate and pragmatic use cases for this, the likelihood of abuse seems high.
- cm2012 8y ago
  Cost per click is going to be vastly lower, since young people look for jobs much more often. You'll get applicants at a third of the price.
- flashman 8y ago
  Just spitballing, I'd tailor my messaging to women aged 30-45 to address our position on helping people return to the workforce, while for over-45s I'd talk about our open policy towards hiring older workers. For each, I'd probably choose photography that featured a representative individual. Yeah, I'm totally stereotyping the audience, but I'm also addressing common issues for jobseekers in those age groups. To be clear, I don't think that's what these companies are doing or they would have spoken up in their defence. And you also have to be careful that you express openness to, rather than preference for, a certain type of worker.
  - fjsolwmv 8y ago
    That's pretty much what Facebook said in it's rebuttal, linked in another comment.
- matte_black 8y ago
  Campaign budgets are limited and you need to optimize your ads so they show up for demographics most likely to respond and be accepted.

vadym909 8y ago

It's an open secret in Silicon Valley that most tech companies prefer younger workers. Recruiters do what hiring managers ask for. Most hiring managers won't say it explicitly- they'll say things like 2-5 years experience from top schools or from the FANG companies with experience in modern technologies.

fjsolwmv 8y ago
It's not age discrimination to ask for relevant job skills and education.
- vadym909 8y ago
  Exactly
- daveFNbuck 8y ago
  How does putting a 2-5 year experience range filter for job skills or education better than saying 2 or more years? Someone with 6 years of experience doesn't have fewer job skills than someone in the 2-5 year range.

lph 8y ago

So who has standing to sue? How can I prove I /didn't/ see a job posting because I'm too old, and what damages could I claim as a result of it?

frankydp 8y ago
It would be difficult to sue for not being the recipient of an advertisement. While it may feel off it is most likely not illegal, because it is an ad and not part of the hiring process. In the same way that the big bech 4 host hackathons(ie recruiting events) at colleges and not retirement communities or really anywhere other than places where the highest population of the target demographic congregates.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  But old people can be at college. That's the material difference; campus police are not going around blocking old peoples' view of advertisements. To provide a counterpoint, you can't legally advertise the fact that there are no blacks in your housing development, however true that may be. In fact, there are many types of dogwhistling that are also banned when it comes to advertisement of housing.
- flashman 8y ago
  > it is an ad and not part of the hiring process. If you were a qualified but rejected applicant, this ad targeting could demonstrate a pattern of behavior when you sued the employer for discrimination.
paulddraper 8y ago
There are no grounds to sue. In the US, companies cannot discriminate against 40+ ages for hiring. But that in no way applies to advertisement. If Facebook puts a job ad billboard in Seattle (mostly white), but not in Atlanta (mostly black), there's no illegal discrimination. And for good reason: Marketing is always about reaching the most likely targets.
- developer2 8y ago

collatzeral 8y ago

FB has publicly defended this in the past. See https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/addressing-targeting-in-recruitment-ads/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/addressing-targeting-in-recru...

fjsolwmv 8y ago
Note: That post is a response to the OP, and a rather weak response saying it "may not in itself be discriminatory — just as it can be OK to run employment ads in magazines and on TV shows targeted at younger or older people" But propublica's article is also weak. Its Facebook examples are stuff like "ad targeted to ages 21-60"

blunte 8y ago

If they don't want me because of my age, I certainly don't want to work for them and provide my skills to them. Also, it's a bit sad that Verizon can't afford an editor or reviewer to tell them to use "you're" correctly... "Here, your more than just a number. Practice data story-telling, analytics, and more."

mythrwy 8y ago
Maybe it's a similar concept to the Nigerian prince scam emails purposefully containing misspellings. If you catch it and raise an eyebrow you aren't the mentality they are looking for.
- blunte 8y ago
  Didn't know this was a thing, but it makes sense. Clever... evil, but clever.

cm2012 8y ago

This is because it's much cheaper to get completed applications (conversions) in a younger demo. Young people are more likely to be looking for jobs than older people, and thus click job ads more. [1] Higher click through rate means much lower cost per click. Based on the numbers in my stat link, you could likely net the same amount of new job applications spending $3000 on millennials as spending $9000 on other demos. This is a user friendly feature - younger people want to see these type of ads more by far. By the data, older people do not want to see these type of ads. Nothing to do with worker effectiveness or how HR treats older applicants. [1] " About 60% of Millennials are currently open to a new job opportunity and are by far the most likely generation to switch jobs. To support that, 21% of Millennials in 2016 reported switching jobs within the past year, compared to roughly 7% of gen Xers and other non-Millennials. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/22/millennia.. https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/22/millennia....

peteretep 8y ago
I was thinking much the same there, that it might simply be cheaper or be shown to be more effective to advertise to these groups, and perhaps there's no issue if they're not discriminating at the point of interview? That said, that may make sense but still be illegal.
jetru 8y ago
Those numbers you are quoting in [1] is BECAUSE of the bias.

mike_n 8y ago

instead of (perhaps illegally) recruiting for people of a certain age group, why not just search for people who liked (for example) Fortnite or Harry Potter or similar categories? Sure, you might get a few false positives (showing your ad to a few older people) or false negatives (missing some of the target group), but it probably works just fine and isn't technically age-oriented. The company could just say that it likes people who are into hobbies (eg - reading fantasy novels or mobile games).

wonderbear 8y ago

"18-35" I just realized how soon I'm going to be "older" for demographic purposes.

dang 8y ago

This had a huge discussion within the window of dupeage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15974603 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15974603

kawera 8y ago
Oh, sorry, I hadn't seen that story before.
- dang 8y ago
  No worries!