4 ms·
This is similar to if the NYT ran discriminatory ads - which is an actual case from the 1980s and resulted in both notable fines, and the NYT having humans revi
by null000 8y ago
This is similar to if the NYT ran discriminatory ads - which is an actual case from the 1980s and resulted in both notable fines, and the NYT having humans review housing ads for discriminatory practices, such as having an unrepresentably white set of models in housing ads (from one of the propublica links in some of the other comments). Same goes for craigslist, which also has to screen housing ads.
I'd argue both are responsible - the platform hosting the ad and the people making the ad.
- AdamM12 8y agoNo only person that is responsible is the person who placed the ad. Facebook didn't select the target market and write up the copy.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- phkahler 8y agoWe need to go by the law here, which indicates an ad publisher is guilty in addition to the one who placed the ad. You may argue an opinion about the law, but it looks like Facebook is in violation of it.
- dibstern 8y agoYou just want to change the law to benefit Facebook. Seems odd. Your other comments state that you value the ideal entirely over the practical, with the practical having no value to you at all. Fortunately, the practical is considered important by lawmakers.
- fma 8y agoI feel like FB could have covered their ass if they had a pop up menu for every rental ad that says "All ads must abide by the Fair Housing Act...click for more info. Check this box if you acknowledge your advertising practice abides by it"