Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Facebook Inc. has been hit with a lawsuit claiming that it violates federal anti-discrimination laws for housing and employment by allowing advertisers to exclude certain groups on the basis of race, gender or religion in social media ads.
In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Nov. 3, a New York woman and two African-American Louisiana residents claim that Facebook's advertising portal allows ad-purchasers to target or exclude certain “ethnic affinities,” including “African-American,” “Asian-American,” and four categories of “Hispanic US.”
According to the complaint, plaintiffs have all used Facebook in searches for housing and employment in the past year. Plaintiffs claim that a button in Facebook's ad tool labeled “Exclude People” can be used to publish discriminatory ads in violation of the Fair Housing Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The lawsuit appears to be the first targeting Facebook with discrimination claims after an Oct. 28 article from public interest journalism site ProPublica reported that Facebook's advertising portal includes options to exclude people by racial affinity. The suit seeks to certify a class of all Facebook users who have been screened out of advertising in the past two years based on race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.
Steve Satterfield, a privacy and public policy manager at Facebook, told ProPublica last week that company policies prohibit advertisers from using the targeting options for discriminatory purposes.
“We take a strong stand against advertisers misusing our platform: Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law,” Satterfield said. “We take prompt enforcement action when we determine that ads violate our policies.”
A Facebook spokesperson echoed Satterfield's remarks in an emailed statement Friday afternoon called the lawsuit “utterly without merit.”
“Multicultural marketing is a common practice in the ad industry and helps brands reach audiences with more relevant advertising,” the spokesperson said. “Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law.”
The complaint, however, points out that two ProPublica reporters were able to purchase a Facebook ad targeting house shoppers that excluded anyone with an African-American, Asian-American or Hispanic affinity and have it approved by Facebook in 15 minutes.
According to the lawsuit, Facebook builds a profile of users that include affinity groups to determine, among other things, the ads users see on the site. While Facebook claims that its affinity groups identify people who are “interested in and likely to respond well” to multicultural content, plaintiffs claim that they serve as “a proxy for characteristics such as a user's race, gender, family status and national origin.” Plaintiffs also claim the platform allows exclusion by familial status (“Divorced,” “Parents (All),” and “Expectant parents”), by sex (“Moms”), and based on religion (“Christian,” “Muslim,” or “Sunni Islam.”)
New Orleans solo practitioners William Most and Jason Flanders and Sarah Hoffman of Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group in Albany, California, the attorneys who filed the suit, point out that there's “no option in Facebook's platform to exclude the 'demographic' of White or Caucasian Americans from the target audience.”
Reached by phone on Nov. 4, Most declined to comment.
*****
Ross Todd writes for The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. He can be reached at [email protected]. On Twitter: @Ross_Todd
In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Nov. 3, a
According to the complaint, plaintiffs have all used Facebook in searches for housing and employment in the past year. Plaintiffs claim that a button in Facebook's ad tool labeled “Exclude People” can be used to publish discriminatory ads in violation of the Fair Housing Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The lawsuit appears to be the first targeting Facebook with discrimination claims after an Oct. 28 article from public interest journalism site ProPublica reported that Facebook's advertising portal includes options to exclude people by racial affinity. The suit seeks to certify a class of all Facebook users who have been screened out of advertising in the past two years based on race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.
Steve Satterfield, a privacy and public policy manager at Facebook, told ProPublica last week that company policies prohibit advertisers from using the targeting options for discriminatory purposes.
“We take a strong stand against advertisers misusing our platform: Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law,” Satterfield said. “We take prompt enforcement action when we determine that ads violate our policies.”
A Facebook spokesperson echoed Satterfield's remarks in an emailed statement Friday afternoon called the lawsuit “utterly without merit.”
“Multicultural marketing is a common practice in the ad industry and helps brands reach audiences with more relevant advertising,” the spokesperson said. “Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law.”
The complaint, however, points out that two ProPublica reporters were able to purchase a Facebook ad targeting house shoppers that excluded anyone with an African-American, Asian-American or Hispanic affinity and have it approved by Facebook in 15 minutes.
According to the lawsuit, Facebook builds a profile of users that include affinity groups to determine, among other things, the ads users see on the site. While Facebook claims that its affinity groups identify people who are “interested in and likely to respond well” to multicultural content, plaintiffs claim that they serve as “a proxy for characteristics such as a user's race, gender, family status and national origin.” Plaintiffs also claim the platform allows exclusion by familial status (“Divorced,” “Parents (All),” and “Expectant parents”), by sex (“Moms”), and based on religion (“Christian,” “Muslim,” or “Sunni Islam.”)
New Orleans solo practitioners William Most and Jason Flanders and Sarah Hoffman of Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group in Albany, California, the attorneys who filed the suit, point out that there's “no option in Facebook's platform to exclude the 'demographic' of White or Caucasian Americans from the target audience.”
Reached by phone on Nov. 4, Most declined to comment.
*****
Ross Todd writes for The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. He can be reached at [email protected]. On Twitter: @Ross_Todd
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.
This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.
Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.