4 ms·
To play devil's advocate, couldn't this just be a way of filtering out people who would likely be less committed to finding a job, or less likely to apply for o
by sebmellen 6y ago
To play devil's advocate, couldn't this just be a way of filtering out people who would likely be less committed to finding a job, or less likely to apply for one they saw in an ad?
From the article:
> Companies trying to run ads on YouTube or elsewhere on the web could direct Google not to show those ads to people of “unknown gender”—meaning people who have not identified themselves to Google as “male” or “female.”
Not allowing an "unknown gender" doesn't necessarily mean purposefully excluding nonbinary people. A better option would be to allow people to choose "nonbinary" as a gender, no?
Not that I'm defending Google's ad monopoly.
- detaro 6y agoHow does having a gender associated with your Google profile indicate being "committed" to finding a job?
- sebmellen 6y agoI mean, I'm sure plenty of people have Youtube accounts for "shitposting" or listening to music that they don't fill out with much detailed information (myself included). On my main Youtube profile, I would include this information, and I would probably be more receptive to ads about jobs I see when using my main profile. I'm saying this could well be more about filtering out people who have less information associated with their profile than filtering by "nonbinaryness."
- wombatpm 6y ago1) People will self identify as anything. I worked for a survey agency. We had many people identify as an Apache Attack Helicopter on surveys. Played havok with the statistics. 2) Any company doing this is just asking for a discrimination lawsuit. Just because Google can show your ads only to single straight white men does not mean you should let them. Has no one stayed awake during diversity training at these companies?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]