Why is Facebook in trouble for this and not the persons who actually placed the ads? They aren't the ones renting the real estate. They don't own it. Government overreach imo.
Edit: grammatical mistakes
Edit: grammatical mistakes
>(c) To make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or discrimination.
If people actually did place housing discrimination ads they'd also be in violation of the law.
(In general, laws are usually written in a way to prevent profiting off of illegal behavior)
The main reason why racial preferences are not allowed to get published -- is because it reinforces public bias toward specific race. But if ads are simply not shown to some group -- what is the problem with that?
It's illegal, that's the problem.
I'd argue both are responsible - the platform hosting the ad and the people making the ad.
How is it different from hardware store that sell knives that can be used to cut vegetables or people, at the discretion of the buyer?
Maybe a better way to deal with that is a different regulation. Mandate the industry designation in the ad and if it is something protected by existing laws, like housing or job ads, remove filters that allow for adding or removing by protected category from the interface.
There is a law on the books prohibiting publishers from publishing descriminitory ads, even if they didn't write them.
That's the difference.
In the context of housing ads (or employment) these tools DO NOT have legal uses.
Thus they are illegal.
Targeting specific demographic using protected categories in other areas can be legal too.
As a pharmaceutical company you can target women, men, seniors for targeted medications. As a LGBTQ dating site you can target based on sexual orientation and cis/trans. It is not illegal. Housing and jobs (maybe something else) are covered by specific legislation.
The fact an LGBT dating site can choose ‘don’t show to heterosexual people (a waste of my ad spend)’ is one of the reasons their platform is so effective, especially compared to mass media like TV/magazines.
The analogous argument for knives would be "In the context of torture knives don't have any legal uses. (So knife sellers need to put safe guards in preventing their knives from torturing people)".
As a user of Facebook, this method of discrimination is markedly different than physically showing up to a house for rent and the home owner taking one look at you, scrunching up their face, and saying it's no longer available, tipping you off that what they are doing is illegal.
I'm trying not to say anything too mean, so I'll just say this: learn some history.
At the very least Facebook could provide section-specific filter, if they haven’t already.
However, we do have laws about sales of guns, chemical weapons precursors, nuclear fuel, aircraft, etc.
Practically speaking, which one sounds better: "HUD files discrimination complaint against Facebook" or "HUD files discrimination complaint against Jimmy's Duplex-Mania in rural Alabama"?
1) https://www.justice.gov/usao/about-offices-united-states-att...
Wait for it.