12 ms·
Facebook approves alcohol, vaping and gambling ads targeting 13-17 year olds
- xkeysc0re 5y agoI don't think there should be a minimum legal age for any of these activities. It's beyond clear that coddling helicopter government invoked disastrous consequences for Western society
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- sodality2 5y agoCan you name some of those consequences in "western society" you believe were caused by "coddling helicopter gov't" actions, similar to regulating advertising addictive products to minors?
- xkeysc0re 5y agoYes. Society-wide we see an increased abdication of personal responsibility and general apathy. Increased mental illness. Severe feelings of loneliness and isolation brought about due to atomization by a government that's operated like a consultancy avoiding any liability or risk.
- sodality2 5y agoI'm curious which government regulation would cause increased mental illness/loneliness? I mean, I'm sure somewhere it's happening because of gov't, but to say it's the main contributor instead of problems like lack of access to good therapy, cultural shifts in how you talk to people, etc., in my mind seems largely a misplacement of blame.
- carpedimebagjoe 5y agoThat maybe so, but those are a lot of different areas to cover. Perhaps specific examples, trends, and/or causes would help support each claim. For example, how is it the government's fault, in particular? Is it only the government's fault? Are there other contributing factors or trends? It comes across too much like oversimplified scapegoatism rather than a reasoned explanation.
- indemnity 5y agoExcept these are problems in most modern developed nations, whether they “coddle” their populace or not. Perhaps our economic system and its focus on efficiency in a race to the bottom, externalities be damned, also bears a small responsibility.
- listless 5y agoI completely agree. The amount of pearl clutching happening in this thread is fascinating. It reminds me very much of the 1980’s fundamentalist Christian house I was raised in. Very much like it.
- minikites 5y agoHow is society improved by letting 8 year olds gamble?
- xkeysc0re 5y ago- Children learn applied mathematic principles earlier, such as odds and optimizations - Gives children a chance to materially understand the meaning of a dollar - Allows for demonstrations of propositional logic and formal reasoning
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoWould you rather find out your kid has a gambling problem (or addictive personality in general) at 8 or 16?
- edoceo 5y agoI hope this means they'll re-eval their policy on 21+ cannabis related ads. huge market potential
- 29athrowaway 5y agoCannabis is illegal at a federal level.
- srswtf123 5y agoSo is alcohol under 21? Edit: looks like I learned something; thanks!
- edoceo 5y agoaksuhally... https://drinkingage.procon.org/states-that-allow-underage-under-21-alcohol-consumption/ https://drinkingage.procon.org/states-that-allow-underage-un... turns out the laws are a little complicated.
- meepmorp 5y agoDrinking under 21 isn't illegal federally: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/23/158 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/23/158 It's just that if your state doesn't set their drinking age to a minimum of 21, they'll lose a big chunk of federal highway funding.
- edoceo 5y agoso is minors gambling (which is this case) - and also these ads never ran. so no change for cannabis and we can put our pitchforks down.
- 29athrowaway 5y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjIv_u4zmck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjIv_u4zmck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qij3aPKA9nE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qij3aPKA9nE
- devenblake 5y agoThe first smoking rejected vs approved ad figure showed two pictures of people with smoke coming out of their mouths rejected and then one picture of someone holding an electric cigarette that was approved. The e-cig wasn't recognizeable to me, I'm not sure if those are great comparisons. And with the second figure - with the gambling, drinking, and dating ads, I don't really get how the final one could be construed absolutely as a dating ad. "Find your gentleman" could be a service for connecting polite but lonely friends. If these are representative of ads that they got approved and disapproved I think their methodology was flawed. It would be easier to look at examples of advertisements that explicitly minor-owned accounts actually saw on their feed that advertise adult services.
- sodality2 5y ago>"Find your gentleman" could be a service for connecting polite but lonely friends. The money emoji and "gentlemen" is clearly associating it with sugar daddies. That would be universally understood in that age cohort, and in the higher part of that range, probably even clicked on often. There's the more mild ads, sure, but the worse ones are really where the issues lie, like the blatant gambling ones.
- carpedimebagjoe 5y agoUnsurprising because FB is all about maximizing profits at society's expense. They'd happily get into human trafficking and child prostitution if they could get away with it. At this point, they have instead created hundreds of millions of attention addicts, outrage consumers, and manufactured sentiments for the purposes of commercial advertising. Oh, and the occasional genocide [0]. It's also curious that, to this day, cigarette companies target children even younger in developing nations. This also is terrible. 0. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46105934 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46105934
- echlebek 5y agoMy prediction: there will never be a bottom for facebook.
- WillDaSilva 5y agoCompanies - specifically large public for-profit companies - are amoral entities solely concerned with maximizing their profits. That Facebook acts seemingly without any morals isn't all that surprising.
- rblatz 5y agoThis is such a “le late stage capitalism” sentiment that I see posted all the time. It completely misrepresents the responsibility of a public company to operate in its shareholders’ best interest.
- aemreunal 5y agoI think the underlying effort with that sentiment is not to agree on what companies' responsibilities or "ethics" are, but rather to create enough guardrails (legislation, rules, public sentiment through the free press, etc.) for companies that they can't act immorally or unethically. I think it's high time we stop assigning personalities to companies, expecting them to be "good people", and start legislating them to prevent them from harming people and the planet in the first place.
- creata 5y agoIf you feel that it's being misrepresented, feel free to represent it properly.
- minikites 5y ago>the responsibility of a public company to operate in its shareholders’ best interest The shareholders are only interested in profits.
- yossarian1408 5y ago
- t-writescode 5y agoI wonder if this is automated. Somebody wants to advertise _something_ to a demographic and Facebook doesn't have any sort of checks in place; or, they do have checks, but the ads lie about it and Facebook doesn't validate it. I wonder how many requests for advertising to a given group they have. I imagine it's a scary high number.
- adjkant 5y agoIt's absolutely automated, but it begs the question, should it be allowed to be, particularly when dealing with minors? It seems crazy this case slipped through to exist when Facebook has been around for so long.
- t-writescode 5y agoThe associated comments that are downvoted seem to imply that Facebook intended for this to happen and it wasn't just automation and bureaucracy. Should it be stopped? If it violates the law, absolutely; but, we should recognize it for what it is, not some nefarious, evil plot to harm the young of multiple nations.
- sodality2 5y agoTrue, it's not malicious intent; if facebook could squeeze every cent out of their platform while advertising scented candles, they certainly would. It's the indifference that matters though.
- ryandrake 5y agoNot sure intent is relevant. Does intent matter when the system is so huge and no single person probably understands or directs it? The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does [1]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...
- 5y ago
- edoceo 5y agothis part seems important: ""Citing ethical concerns, Reset Australia did not pay for the advertisements and they did not run on the Facebook platform, but the group believes they had passed the company's internal checks""
- sodality2 5y agoI wonder what would have happened if they had? Maybe redirect it to a blank page? Might not have passed an ethics board (but hey, who knows nowadays!) if they actually advertised it though.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- fallingknife 5y agoI guess I just don't really care if teenagers are doing the same things I did as a teenager.
- sodality2 5y agoMy father grew up when it was incredibly common in high school to smoke a lot of cigarettes. Many in his class have since died of lung cancer. In my high school, vapes are the most dangerous thing I've seen. Generally, you hope the next generation grows up a little bit better than the previous one. I think alcohol/vaping/gambling ads are a net negative when advertised to minors, causing addiction in a lot of cases.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- adamsvystun 5y agoWhile it is obviously unethical, is advertising alcohol, vaping and gambling to 13-17 year olds illegal in Australia? Asking because I am not sure if Facebook should be making the shots here on what is legal or illegal to advertise. This is best handled through government.
- tdonovic 5y agoYes. It is absolutely illegal. Not sure anywhere where this would be legal. Ie. "TV or radio ads about alcohol cannot target children. They also should not be irresponsible in targeting adults." https://www.acma.gov.au/ads-alcohol-tobacco-or-therapeutic-goods https://www.acma.gov.au/ads-alcohol-tobacco-or-therapeutic-g... Edit: changed the example
- nemo44x 5y agoWhat does that have to do with this? I do agree though and would go further and make it illegal to show ads to anyone whose profile states they are under 18.
- tdonovic 5y agoYou can't, as in any developed nation I can think of, advertise alcohol to children. Take a look at the actions the industry has taken when they even put alcohol ads too close to children, or too appealing to children, ctrl-f for moon dog. https://www.abac.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ABAC-Quarterly-Media-Update-31-March-2018.pdf https://www.abac.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ABAC-Quar... You cannot advertise alcohol to children in Australia
- nemo44x 5y agoAgreed. Instead of expecting a for-profit company to decide what’s ok we should simply pass laws that makes advertising to people under 18 illegal. For instance if your social media account says you are less than 18 then it should be illegal to show any ad to you. This will have the additional benefit of internet communication technology companies having to rethink kids as a profit center.
- condomhacker2 5y agoShouldn’t this be the advertisers’ problem instead of facebook’s?
- condomhacker2 5y agoShouldn’t they be blaming the advertisers instead of Facebook? Facebook has too many things to look at from pornography, violence, cornona virus, election integrity and now even this?
- sodality2 5y agoThe advertisements were never shown- they were just added to their internal systems and were (thought to be) approved. >The findings were revealed in a report, released today, by lobby group Reset Australia — the local arm of a global initiative working to "counter digital threats to democracy".
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- nemo44x 5y agoPass laws to make it illegal to advertise to people under 18. We somehow expect FB to arbitrate but that’s just not possible. It isn’t even their fault in the end - they operate within legal boundaries. We should make it unlawful to advertise to people under 18 and prosecute offenders, harshly.
- blonde_ocean 5y agoHow in the hell can you expect advertisement in the 21st century to not reach minors? We might as well legislate that all minors must wear blindfolds at all times, or be blinded as they’re born.
- hellbannedguy 5y agoFacebook brags about real identities only. If anyone could figure out an algorithm that identifies minors it's that company. They might not get 100% accuracy, but pretty close, especially if Marky thought the fine might make him less wealthy.
- minikites 5y agoBetter not do anything at all, then.
- runarberg 5y agoThere is a pretty stark difference between being exposed to ads and being targeted by ads. Ad mascots like Tony the Tiger selling sugared serials would never fly in the EU as it is obviously targeting children. I’m pretty sure parent is referring to the latter.
- bryan_w 5y ago> Pass laws to make it illegal to advertise to people under 18. Yes, let's get ads out of cartoons and out of newspapers that carry comics sections. I'm sure that will go well.
- runarberg 5y ago
- tbwriting 5y agoDrinking harms the adolescent brain. Why comment about how “it’s legal there” or “teens already do it” or “it’s really the advertisers’ fault”? Where does defending Facebook’s behavior get you?
- op03 5y agoYou get job offers from FB recruiters.
- t-writescode 5y agoBecause when condemning someone's actions, you need to be sure to condemn what they've actually done wrong and not things that you wouldn't condemn someone else for if they weren't Facebook.
- aierou 5y agoI think it's important to recognize that Reset Australia is a traditional media lobby group, and that this report amounts to a zero-day attack on Facebook's automated advertising system. Facebook would never choose to advertise these products to children for a variety of reasons. Reading the sentiment in this thread, when exactly did we create the expectation that Facebook (or any social media entity) must execute as a perfect moral system?
- lamontcg 5y agoThey have a nasty problem of behaving completely amorally until someone points it out.
- TedShiller 5y agoWhy? Because money
- jollybean 5y agoWithout a link to the actual report, which hopefully contains more information, anyone who's ever spent $5 running a campaign on FB would know this is a little suspicious. You can upload content to your hearts content, but ads are not actually 'approved' until they running. And there's no way to actually 'target' without running an ad ... which they didn't do ... so ... If they were looking for hard evidence, they could have in fact put $5 into FB, and put the ad 'live' and simply taken it down once it was approved, but before it received any views (though technically that might not be perfectly possible, it is pragmatically possible). It's possible to mine data sets, and do queries on userbase behaviours etc, but none of that would be in the context of a specific ad being run. I think this is also what the article alludes to, and it crosses streams with the other part of the story and probably causes confusion. All of that aside, the notion that FB, a $800B company is going to risk that by blatantly running ads for alcohol to minors where it is clearly illegal kind of defies the logic of a very self-interested entity like Facebook. How much money would they make from that, while risking sanctions and major fallout? Probably almost none, as the buyers of ads would probably be doing something illegal, how many breweries are going to be running ads to 14 year olds? Basically none, so there's no money in this activity, and only downside. More appropriately, it would help the case if someone, somewhere in Australia actually found FB ads that are targeting children. Finally, there is nowhere them to hide, making the claims a little more suspicious. Everyone on the planet, can right now (including you reading this), pop open Facebook, upload an ad and try to run it. Judge, police, regulators, you, me, anyone in the world can just 'see for ourselves' at a moments notice, at any time, with less than 5 minutes without any need for complicated research - find out if FB is really enabling vaping ads to teenagers. It seems odd that something so illegal would be so out in the open, visible to everyone. Edit: not 'defending' FB here, just calling out what I see as possibly a big inconsistency and problems with truthiness. I've never been a fan of Facebook, I loathed them from the start, but facts are facts, and this story does not pass the smell test, we'll need to see more data. There are probably a ton of legit things to deal with on FB, I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt they are running vaping ads to kids.
- tdfx 5y agoYes, this reads like it was written by someone who has never run a real Facebook ad. Facebook routinely accidentally blocks legitimate advertisers from running normal, compliant ads, and there's a massive underground devoted to beating Facebook's algorithms to get non-compliant ads running. This looks like they just got lucky with a few ad sets, and since they never set them active, it looks like they might've not been approved, anyway.
- spicyramen 5y agoPeople without kids probably agree to this
- akomtu 5y agoPension funds demand more profits, FB complies and sells teenagers (i.e. the nation's future) to the alcohol and gambling industry. This is pretty much what America is about these days: the top 1% is milking the bottom 50% and hardly anybody cares about the future.
- wait_a_minute 5y agoTax the billionaires more tbh
- Layke1123 5y agoYou will get downvoted for saying that, even though it's obviously the truth.
- magnetowasright 5y agoShameful that the ABC doesn’t know the difference between teenager’s and teenagers’. The article briefly mentions that the relatively restrictive laws around traditional advertising haven’t kept up with social media. I think that should be the focus of the article; we know companies (including those wanting to advertise and advertisement platforms) will do absolutely everything they are not forbidden from doing if it brings them more money. They might still do the forbidden things anyway if the punishment isn’t substantial. They won’t stop doing this out of the goodness of their pockets, I mean hearts. It’s an unfortunate reality for most of us, but it’s how things work currently. We should be holding our politicians accountable for their total lack of digital awareness and their general willingness to prioritise money and power over their constituents. With the Murdoch media profiting from and controlling the narrative, the ABC is one major outlet that might be able to switch people on to these issues, but they turn out this ungrammatical drivel instead.
- threesmegiste 5y agoI think some paying fb haters out there. All Similar allegations are made much more often by other social media networks. someone is hiding something.