News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads to young males. Parent comment

Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by elipsey on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @03:41PM (#18018476)
Is access to employment is an "inane" concern? Is it moral, or legal, for employers to algorithmically exclude arbitrary classes from receiving or discovering job listings?

Consider expanding this sort of technique to monster/linkdin/glassdoor/etc so that you aren't shown job listings because it can be inferred that you are probably over 30, or Republican, for example.

It seems that ACLU wants to use this as a test case to clarify what is or isn't legal before this practice becomes a pervasive part of the employment market.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by SamReidHughes on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @04:09PM (#18018675)
How is access to employment improved by making job ads more expensive?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by elipsey on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @05:42PM (#18019415)
Would you care to make a more detailed argument or proposal? I'm willing, in general, to be persuaded by a good argument, but you'll have to show your work. :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by drak0n1c on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @07:23PM (#18020210)
If roofing job advertisers are forced to spend half of their budget on a demographic that objectively clicks through at a drastically lower rate, they will have to spend 2X more money to reach the same number of workers that they used to reach.

Making advertising those jobs on Facebook 2X more expensive is an incentive for those firms to revert to alternative hiring habits that are even more nepotistic, reducing overall access to employment.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by mmt on Wednesday September 19, 2018 @12:16AM (#18021625)
> spend half of their budget on a demographic objectively clicks through at a drastically lower rate, they will have to spend 2X more money

This reasoning pre-supposes that only CPM-style ads are available, to the exclusion of CPC or CPA, but that seems unlikely on a platform as modern as FB.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by SamReidHughes on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @06:37PM (#18019887)
Don't regulate job ads targeting at all, so that it's as cheap as possible to post a job ad and so that there are no burdens on websites that host job listings.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by p1necone on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @07:08PM (#18020094)
That's not really an argument. It's just a conclusion begging for some justification.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by SamReidHughes on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @07:35PM (#18020302)
The justification of maximizing people's access to job listings is very evident in what I wrote.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ACLU files charges against Facebook for targeting job ads... by p1necone on Thursday September 20, 2018 @06:40PM (#18035984)
That's a conclusion, not a justification. The very topic we are discussing is that ignoring regulation causes some classes of people to be excluded entirely from some job postings. You are arguing the opposite, which is fine - but you can't just claim that it's self evident.
[ Parent | on HN ]