6 ms·

Facebook is the publisher of the ads and is responsible for obeying the law. If someone asks Facebook to publish an illegal ad, Facebook should not do it. Thi

Facebook is the publisher of the ads and is responsible for obeying the law. If someone asks Facebook to publish an illegal ad, Facebook should not do it. This is not a free speech issue, or a political speech issue. Nobody is censoring progressive or conservative positions in this case. It's an issue of legality in real estate advertising under a framework of laws that were written decades ago.

j16sdiz 8y ago
The problem is: These kind of censorship of use generated content can't scale up to all jurisdiction. Maybe we should acknowledge it is impossible to make a global, legal, Facebook-like website.
- wyattpeak 8y ago
  Why would we do that? We haven't been able to stop merchants swindling customers since the invention of trade, but we don't throw up our hands and shut down all markets. We just do the best we can to keep things as upright as possible.
- guelo 8y ago
  Society doesn't have to accommodate Facebook's need to scale their businesses. If Facebook is unable to comply with a jurisdiction's laws then it shouldn't do business in that jurisdiction.
- r00fus 8y ago
  If Facebook makes money on it they have the funds to stop it. No slippery slope. This shit is illegal and has been for decades . Just because it happens on the internet doesn't make it any less illegal.
- chickenfries 8y ago
  We're not talking about someone singing up for a free account with a burner email and posting on a Facebook group. We're talking about Facebook's ad targeting product from which they make a substantial profit...
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  It's not even the censorship of user generated content. Facebook allows you to exclude housing ads from being shown to protected classes of people. Facebook effectively says "Do you want to hide this ad from disabled people?" All they have to do to comply with anti-discrimination laws is to not offer this kind of exclusion.
Karishma1234 8y ago
The fact that I want to tell others that I want to rent out my property to people that meet criteria chosen by me is both a free speech and private property issue. This is 50 year old law that deserves a repeal in my opinion.

j16sdiz 8y ago

The problem is: These kind of censorship of use generated content can't scale up to all jurisdiction. Maybe we should acknowledge it is impossible to make a global, legal, Facebook-like website.

wyattpeak 8y ago
Why would we do that? We haven't been able to stop merchants swindling customers since the invention of trade, but we don't throw up our hands and shut down all markets. We just do the best we can to keep things as upright as possible.
guelo 8y ago
Society doesn't have to accommodate Facebook's need to scale their businesses. If Facebook is unable to comply with a jurisdiction's laws then it shouldn't do business in that jurisdiction.
r00fus 8y ago
If Facebook makes money on it they have the funds to stop it. No slippery slope. This shit is illegal and has been for decades . Just because it happens on the internet doesn't make it any less illegal.
chickenfries 8y ago
We're not talking about someone singing up for a free account with a burner email and posting on a Facebook group. We're talking about Facebook's ad targeting product from which they make a substantial profit...
bobthepanda 8y ago
It's not even the censorship of user generated content. Facebook allows you to exclude housing ads from being shown to protected classes of people. Facebook effectively says "Do you want to hide this ad from disabled people?" All they have to do to comply with anti-discrimination laws is to not offer this kind of exclusion.

Karishma1234 8y ago

The fact that I want to tell others that I want to rent out my property to people that meet criteria chosen by me is both a free speech and private property issue. This is 50 year old law that deserves a repeal in my opinion.