ACLU Reveals Facebook allows job postings that women can't see

Interested Observer · Sep 19, 2018

"Many of the postings, like those for mechanics or truck drivers, were in male-dominated fields"

I actually don't have a problem with this really. It's a massive waste of money to advertise to people who have no interest in what you're selling. I'm sure there are other types of ads that only get targeted at women rather than men.

The stuff about race though...

Marvie · Sep 19, 2018

Facebook continues to be trash

Nassudan · Sep 19, 2018

https://i-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/i./i/newpix/2018/07/25/23/050CAD48000007D0-0-image-a-24_1532557816000.jpg

"FELLOW humans! There is nothing to see here. Please move along and return to the tasks at hand and designated by your protocols."

fanboi · Sep 19, 2018

I can see the reason to seperate between male and female for an advertisment regarding a product... but this was for an ad for a job (which I assume is a seperate function in Facebook and not the same as the Ad tool).

Anarion07 · Sep 19, 2018

If it is indeed via the Facebook Ads Manager, then no company would target a male dominated job to women.

If the analysis shows that your cost per click for an ad is 1$ for a man and 4$ for a woman, then of course they will adjust the audience accordingly if they have the tools to do so.

But of course Facebook could remove said options entirely.

Deleted member 40797 · Sep 19, 2018

Anarion07 said:
If the analysis shows that your cost per click for an ad is 1$ for a man and 4$ for a woman, then of course they will adjust the audience accordingly if they have the tools to do so.

The problem isn't just that Facebook is violating social norms - they are also violating federal anti-discrimination laws (or at least facilitating said violations).

브라이언 · Sep 19, 2018

legacyzero said:
MySpace died so this shit could live

can myspace come back plz

pizoxuat · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
"Many of the postings, like those for mechanics or truck drivers, were in male-dominated fields"

I actually don't have a problem with this really. It's a massive waste of money to advertise to people who have no interest in what you're selling. I'm sure there are other types of ads that only get targeted at women rather than men.

The stuff about race though...

So if you are a police woman or a man in nursing, fuck you?

Greigor the FellHand · Sep 19, 2018

super fuck them.

no one should have a facebook account.

let it be bots and ai that continue to steal investory money

HStallion · Sep 19, 2018

Fuckerberg fucks again.

Cursed Mega Man Mask · Sep 19, 2018

y i k e s

Invisible Cities · Sep 19, 2018

Every week we find out someething terrible about Facebook. Imagine what we haven't heard yet!

Interested Observer · Sep 19, 2018

pizoxuat said:
So if you are a police woman or a man in nursing, fuck you?

Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

Steeped in a Sea of Games · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

Companies are expected to go out of their way to ensure equal opportunity, even at some personal cost.

HStallion · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

This seems to be making up a very specific scenario to make this look less shitty, one that doesn't even hold a lot of water considering most hiring managers are going to want to cast as wide a net as possible to get a chance to hire people, at least in my experience

shnurgleton · Sep 19, 2018

This is the problem with feeding your AI training data that is inherently discriminatory because it comes from a discriminatory society

Sorry guys, AI is evil because we are

marrec · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

That's not how hiring works in 2018. You don't choose to discriminate because you're thinking with outdated models, the job market is extremely competitive right now and if you limit yourself based on antiquated thinking you're going to lose out on amazing candidates.

pizoxuat · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

So you want companies to be able to punish people for working outside of gender stereotypes as long as it saves some pennies. That's not how the law is currently set up.

BossAttack · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
Pretend you are a hiring manager.
You have a limited budget.
You know the majority of your staff are men (or women).
You have positions to fill.
YOU HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET.
You make obvious decisions to target groups of people who are most likely to fill those roles.
The internet loses its mind.

Do you know what EEO laws are? Because it sounds like your hypothetical company is run by a moron looking to be sued by the Federal Government.

ZeroX · Sep 19, 2018

Yeah my understanding here is that companies made job ads, they chose to target based on gender and Facebook approved without properly reviewing the advertisement. Faceebook's ad review only takes 1-2 minutes in my experience. They do it really quickly and basically just check for any kind of explicit sexual content. It's not very comprehensive.

If they were using proper targeting based on non-gender factors it'd be very easy for them to narrow it down to people who are best suited for the job anyway, which in some cases would be gender imbalanced but not illegally so/fully exclusive. Seems like clumsy work from everyone involved.

Interested Observer · Sep 19, 2018

HStallion said:
This seems to be making up a very specific scenario to make this look less shitty, one that doesn't even hold a lot of water considering most hiring managers are going to want to cast as wide a net as possible to get a chance to hire people, at least in my experience

marrec said:
That's not how hiring works in 2018. You don't choose to discriminate because you're thinking with outdated models, the job market is extremely competitive right now and if you limit yourself based on antiquated thinking you're going to lose out on amazing candidates.

Don't get me wrong guys. I work in data science and if companies were advertising this kind of job to men and not women then this is completely out of line (in fact extend that to race, any gender, etc etc). Hiring managers should absolutely want to cast the net as wide as possible for a lot or even most roles. If you point your ads at men only in this case you're an idiot.

In the past though I used to do a highly manual/physical job in very remote places, working outdoors often with no access to facilities and the simple reality is that all the staff were men. Such jobs exist.

pizoxuat · Sep 19, 2018

Interested Observer said:
In the past though I used to do a highly manual/physical job in very remote places, working outdoors often with no access to facilities and the simple reality is that all the staff were men. Such jobs exist.

You should look at the jobs that were discovered using the gender filter to only display to men, because none of those jobs were your hypothetical man-only jobs. One was a police department, for christssake.

Linkura · Sep 19, 2018

Daphne said:
Is this illegal in the US? Please tell me it is.

I never used Facebook due to these types of worries and damn I feel justified with everything.

It is illegal.

Facebook was a fucking mistake.

Buckle · Sep 19, 2018

Time for more apology ads.

"We mean it this time and aren't hiding even more damaging stuff from you. We promise."

Zoe · Sep 19, 2018

Linkura said:
It is illegal.

Facebook was a fucking mistake.

This is new territory for the courts. Different levels have had different opinions.

riotous · Sep 19, 2018

nynt9 said:
Ads do go through an approval process, even though it usually feels like just a rubber stamp. I doubt they put too much thought into it beyond "is this illegal/NSFW"

Yeah I've submitted ads to Google before for a web site I ran; it was all very fast and I got the feeling it was more a legality / NSFW / formatting check than anything.

If Facebook is going to allow targeting based on sex then they should vet those ads more; but that could get complicated as I'm sure those options can be tweaked after submittal. Perhaps if you change those settings any time to be exclusive to one sex your ad goes through re-approval.

quickly said:
The ProPublica articles mentioned in the article are pretty damning and cover the targeted advertising system in more detail:

https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers-exclude-users-by-race (10/2016)

https://www.propublica.org/article/...scrimination-housing-race-sex-national-origin (11/2017)

But isn't that old news? Facebook changed most of that and got rid of a lot of this type of targetting.

Kthulhu · Sep 19, 2018

Oh I'm sure this is just for acting or models-

Many of the postings, like those for mechanics or truck drivers, were in male-dominated fields.

Never mind.

Protein · Sep 19, 2018

Jesus fucking Christ.

Kthulhu · Sep 19, 2018

shnurgleton said:
This is the problem with feeding your AI training data that is inherently discriminatory because it comes from a discriminatory society

Sorry guys, AI is evil because we are

AI in high pitched synth voice: "I learned it from watching you!"

riotous · Sep 19, 2018

Kthulhu said:
Oh I'm sure this is just for acting or models-

Never mind.

I mean the option is there for all advertisements; job ads represent some small portion of the advertisements on Facebook. The option wasn't invented for discriminatory job ads it was likely invented for general ad targeting.

Sell a product meant for women? Well then target women, you'll pay for 10,000 impressions and all but guarantee those 10,000 are for women and not wasted on men who wouldn't be interested.

The fact that this can then be used by people discriminating when submitting ads for jobs sucks, and Facebook should do something about it, but people acting like this technology was DESIGNED for that is just bizarre. The tech wasn't designed for job ads at all in the first place.

Someone wants to place a job ad on Facebook, they fill out a form, upload some images and text.. check some targetting boxes.. some human checks to make sure the ad doesn't have a set of tits in it or a malicious script and approves it. That's what happens here in these situations.

Deleted member 40797 · Sep 19, 2018

riotous said:
But isn't that old news? Facebook changed most of that and got rid of a lot of this type of targetting.

Sorta - this is a decent overview of their response. It just reinforces how problematic enforcing anti-discrimination laws with targeted online advertising is.

ZackieChan · Sep 19, 2018

Zoe said:
This isn't the first case.

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/16/637499979/are-job-ads-targeting-young-workers-breaking-the-law

The decisions have gone back and forth. 7th Circuit sided with the job seeker. The article says the appeal is happening this month, but that's the latest article I could find.

Thanks for posting. Interesting to see how this plays out.
I've bought Facebook ads before, and I'm glad I'm able to target by gender, age, etc. Helps to get the right people seeing my stuff and avoiding wasting money on ads to the wrong demographic. Maybe an exception could be made for job ads?
Not really seeing why this invites all the "Facebook is trash" posts, though. The ad targeting is chosen by the ad buyer. Might not even be the company hiring, but their recruiters or whatever. I think a lot of people read that thread title and shot off posts. Gg Era.

quickly said:
The problem isn't just that Facebook is violating social norms - they are also violating federal anti-discrimination laws (or at least facilitating said violations).

They are? Maybe you have an argument with facilitating, but is that a violation of the law?
I guess we'll see when the courts decide.

Deleted member 40797 · Sep 19, 2018

ZackieChan said:
They are? Maybe you have an argument with facilitating, but is that a violation of the law? I guess we'll see when the courts decide.

Well, this is a report on the WA state investigation (07/2018) that resulted from the ProPublica article on housing ads. I believed someone linked an article on the most recent round of changes as well.

ZackieChan · Sep 19, 2018

quickly said:
Well, this is a report on the WA state investigation (07/2018) that resulted from the ProPublica article on housing ads. I believed someone linked an article on the most recent round of changes as well.

Interesting, but not evidence of illegality. It's an investigation from the WA Attorney Generals office which led to an agreement. Not a judicial decision.
That's why I'm waiting to see those others.

Also, what if you were a pro-LGBT org and wanted to advertise specifically to them? Can you not do that? Seems like they threw out the good with the bad. Maybe there should be a better solution.

just_myles · Sep 19, 2018

Kotto said:
Yea a bunch of white workers with a significant number of Asians but an insignificant amount of black and latinx workers is not extremely diverse.

Not enough diversity. They probably have a token black guy in the cubicles, but it is probably just him/her. There are few to no non-white role models, and minorities aren't being hired to higher positions. There is a very small amount of black and latinx representation and it is going to just decline from here unless these companies make some major strides.

I have worked in entertainment IT for 7 years. I swear it's like walking on another planet.

oddjobs · Sep 20, 2018

riotous said:
I mean the option is there for all advertisements; job ads represent some small portion of the advertisements on Facebook. The option wasn't invented for discriminatory job ads it was likely invented for general ad targeting.

Sell a product meant for women? Well then target women, you'll pay for 10,000 impressions and all but guarantee those 10,000 are for women and not wasted on men who wouldn't be interested.

The fact that this can then be used by people discriminating when submitting ads for jobs sucks, and Facebook should do something about it, but people acting like this technology was DESIGNED for that is just bizarre. The tech wasn't designed for job ads at all in the first place.

Someone wants to place a job ad on Facebook, they fill out a form, upload some images and text.. check some targetting boxes.. some human checks to make sure the ad doesn't have a set of tits in it or a malicious script and approves it. That's what happens here in these situations.

This. Not good optics for Facebook and they probably could (and should) identify job ads easily, limiting the targeting options for those but in this case I'd say the blame lays with the advertisers.

Slayven · Sep 20, 2018

Why even create an ad system that works like this? They are selling discrimination as a feature

turtle553 · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
Why even create an ad system that works like this? They are selling discrimination as a feature

Because targeting ads is a huge benefit to people. My rugby team will run ads for men, age 20-40, withing 25 miles of our city. Would be a lot less effective if we had to pay for 70 year old women.

ZackieChan · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
Why even create an ad system that works like this? They are selling discrimination as a feature

If you have a product that's only for women, for example, and you pay by impression or click, do you want to pay for showing the ad to guys? There are significant non-discriminatory uses for such a system.

Slayven · Sep 20, 2018

turtle553 said:
Because targeting ads is a huge benefit to people. My rugby team will run ads for men, age 20-40, withing 25 miles of our city. Would be a lot less effective if we had to pay for 70 year old women.

ZackieChan said:
If you have a product that's only for women, for example, and you pay by impression or click, do you want to pay for showing the ad to guys? There are significant non-discriminatory uses for such a system.

My tv doesn't turn off when a L'oreal commercial plays

riotous · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
My tv doesn't turn off when a L'oreal commercial plays

Your TV plays L'oreal commercials during shows the network thinks women are watching. They put commercials for Marvel films during Marvel TV shows, etc.

Online advertising is just a far more precise and targeted version of that.

It opens the door for "discrimination" for important stuff like job advertisements or say real estate; but for your average product it's relatively benign and just makes sense. If you sell comic books would you pay $50 for 10,000 random ad impressions of $50 for 10,000 ad impressions shown to people who the host guarantees have bought comic books in the last 30 days?

Slayven · Sep 20, 2018

riotous said:
Your TV plays L'oreal commercials during shows the network thinks women are watching. They put commercials for Marvel films during Marvel TV shows, etc.

Online advertising is just a far more precise and targeted version of that.

It opens the door for "discrimination" for important stuff like job advertisements or say real estate; but for your average product it's relatively benign and just makes sense. If you sell comic books would you pay $50 for 10,000 random ad impressions of $50 for 10,000 ad impressions shown to people who the host guarantees have bought comic books in the last 30 days?

Why were the options even implemented for Job advertisements? How do you know you have the best person for the job when everyone isn't getting the message? Too much fuckery comes out from Facebook to give them any kind of benefit of the doubt.

gutter_trash · Sep 20, 2018

fuck the Zuck

CitizenVectron · Sep 20, 2018

Ethan Hutn said:
Probably are. Nurses or carers....

Male nurses are highly sought after, and get promotions and better positions much more than women, so I doubt that.

Joni · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
Why were the options even implemented for Job advertisements? How do you know you have the best person for the job when everyone isn't getting the message? Too much fuckery comes out from Facebook to give them any kind of benefit of the doubt.

What is more likely? They implemented a system similar to normal ads and explicitly added the option, or they quickly tweaked the ad option for job ads and called it a day?

Slayven · Sep 20, 2018

Joni said:
What is more likely? They implemented a system similar to normal ads and explicitly added the option, or they quickly tweaked the ad option for job ads and called it a day?

In a vacuum it would seem like gross incompetent, but too much shit has happened in the last few years to give them the benefit of a doubt. Analytica Cambridge, banning Trans people for being Trans, the unchecked harassment and racism, etc.

riotous · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
Why were the options even implemented for Job advertisements? How do you know you have the best person for the job when everyone isn't getting the message? Too much fuckery comes out from Facebook to give them any kind of benefit of the doubt.

Options are available for every ad, there isn't a special system in place for job ads vs any other ad.

As noted they should do something about it for sure.

This is company's buying ads making the choice to Target one sex over the other, Facebook obviously also let's you not choose that option. The option itself wasn't designed for job advertisements, you are over thinking this if you think this was some conspiracy by Facebook to enable job discrimination IMO.

Zoe · Sep 20, 2018

Slayven said:
Why were the options even implemented for Job advertisements? How do you know you have the best person for the job when everyone isn't getting the message? Too much fuckery comes out from Facebook to give them any kind of benefit of the doubt.

Because they're not job advertisements, they're advertisements that happen to be about jobs. Facebook's system doesn't distinguish the difference in content.

Mulciber · Sep 20, 2018

riotous said:
Your TV plays L'oreal commercials during shows the network thinks women are watching. They put commercials for Marvel films during Marvel TV shows, etc.

Online advertising is just a far more precise and targeted version of that.

It opens the door for "discrimination" for important stuff like job advertisements or say real estate; but for your average product it's relatively benign and just makes sense. If you sell comic books would you pay $50 for 10,000 random ad impressions of $50 for 10,000 ad impressions shown to people who the host guarantees have bought comic books in the last 30 days?

This is exactly what I figured was going on here. This is something Facebook should fix, but the companies that need to be put on blast here are the ones that chose to use the ad system to buy ads for jobs and chose to discriminate by gender.

Of course ultimately, this is a problem that is impossible to fix completely. Any company could choose to only advertise on sites like Men's Health, Maxim, etc. and achieve a similar result.

Slayven · Sep 20, 2018

riotous said:
Options are available for every ad, there isn't a special system in place for job ads vs any other ad.

As noted they should do something about it for sure.

This is company's buying ads making the choice to Target one sex over the other, Facebook obviously also let's you not choose that option. The option itself wasn't designed for job advertisements, you are over thinking this if you think this was some conspiracy by Facebook to enable job discrimination IMO.

Zoe said:
Because they're not job advertisements, they're advertisements that happen to be about jobs. Facebook's system doesn't distinguish the difference in content.

Then why is Facebook allowing it to be used for jobs?

You design something and put it into use, you see people using it incorrectly. It's on you to fix it

ACLU Reveals Facebook allows job postings that women can't see

User requested account closure

Self-requested ban

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Never read a comic in his life

Never read a comic in his life

Never read a comic in his life

Never read a comic in his life

Never read a comic in his life