Posted on 09/25/2023 7:42:00 PM PDT by algore
Facebook can be sued over allegations that its advertising algorithm is discriminatory, a California state court of appeals ruled last week. The decision stems from a class action lawsuit filed against Facebook in 2020, which accused the company of not showing insurance ads to women and older people in violation of civil rights laws.
The case centers around Samantha Liapes, a 48-year-old woman who turned to Facebook to find an insurance provider. The lawsuit alleges that Facebook’s ad delivery system didn’t show Liapes ads for insurance due to her age and gender.
In a September 21st ruling, the appeals court reversed a previous decision that said Section 230 (which protects online platforms from legal liability if users post illegal content) shields Facebook from accountability. The appeals court concluded that the case “adequately” alleges that Facebook “knew insurance advertisers intentionally targeted its ads based on users’ age and gender” in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
It also found significant similarities between Facebook’s ad platform and Roommates.com, a service that exceeded the protections of Section 230 by including drop-down menus with options that allowed for discrimination. “There is little difference with Facebook’s ad tools” and their targeting capabilities, the court concluded. “Facebook does not merely proliferate and disseminate content as a publisher ... it creates, shapes, or develops content” with the tools.
Facebook’s ad algorithm has faced scrutiny for years now, with a federal lawsuit filed in 2018 accusing the company of enabling housing discrimination and subsequent studies backing up these claims. Facebook settled with the US government in 2022 and launched a new ad distribution system to address housing discrimination earlier this year.
on the other hand if this suit prevails, all Social Media as we know it is over.
Would that be a bad thing?
Also why would they not show her who was selling insurance in her area?
The biggest sham was these marketing companies taking data from average people and making billions from it.
Looks like the article outlines that the insurance companies had ads targeting certain demographics and FB sold its services to use its algorithms to target users and, conversely, not other users.
They did it to themselves. I hope it’s very, very painful (expensive).
Ironically, FB’s liability policy likely excludes unlawful acts. That - plus large payouts and a lot of negative publicity - would please me greatly.
“The case centers around Samantha Liapes, a 48-year-old woman who turned to Facebook to find an insurance provider.”
If she’s using Facebook to find an insurance provider, perhaps Facebook should have alerted authorities.
“on the other hand if this suit prevails, all Social Media as we know it is over.”
One can only hope so...
I just don’t understand this. The whole thing about online ads is that they track you, find out what you’re likely to buy, and try and sell it to you.
That’s the only advantage it has over old media at all. And if you take the basic effort you can block most ads easily anyway.
I mean this is basically complaining you aren’t getting enough spam. Wild.
In that case, I hope it prevails.
Advertising is one of the few industries that is legally permitted to openly discriminate on the basis of race, sex, etc. An advertiser can explicitly hire only Asians, for example, for TV ads that are aimed at an Asian audience.
“Also why would they not show her who was selling insurance in her area?”
This might be a swag but perhaps or maybe that woman is using VPN.
“Also why would they not show her who was selling insurance in her area?”
This might be a swag but perhaps or maybe that woman is using VPN.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.