Skip to main content

Facebook sued over alleged ethnic discrimination in housing, employment ads

facebook news hire
bloomua / 123rf
Facebook is facing renewed pressure over the “ethnic affinity” option within its ad-targeting tool courtesy of a lawsuit that claims the feature is racially biased.

Ethnic affinity essentially enables marketers to exclude certain demographics — such as African-Americans, Asian-Americans or Hispanics — from their promos on the social network. Following the release of a report in October that labeled the feature unlawful, Facebook issued a statement defending targeted advertising as an industry norm. The company also emphasized its aggressive enforcement action against discriminatory ads.

Recommended Videos

The suit, which was filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, retains the arguments put forward in the recent report by news outlet ProPublica. It alleges that Facebook’s advertising platform enables illegal discrimination and is in violation of the Fair Housing Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The latter outlaws employers from discriminating against prospective employees as part of the hiring process based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The former makes it illegal to do the same in regards to housing advertisements.

Please enable Javascript to view this content

The suit adds there is no option in Facebook’s platform “to exclude the ‘demographic’ of white or caucasian Americans from the target audience.” The plaintiffs are described as Facebook users that have looked at Facebook advertisements during their respective searches for housing or employment. The defendants are not seeking the closure of Facebook’s ad platform or even the exclusion mechanism, but to end the illegal uses of the function.

Facebook claims its ethnic affinity data is not the same as race — specifically, the company refers to the fact it does not ask for a person’s ethnic information during the sign-up process. However, the suit alleges that affinity groups act as a “proxy” for a user’s race, gender, family, and national origin.

“The lawsuit is utterly without merit and we will defend ourselves vigorously.  Multicultural marketing is a common practice in the ad industry and helps brands reach audiences with more relevant advertising,” a Facebook spokesperson told Digital Trends in an emailed statement. “Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law.” 

In October, Facebook’s Head of Multicultural Christian Martinez stated the following about the targeting feature in a blog post: “[It] prevents audiences for community-specific ads from seeing a generic ad targeted to a large group and helps avoid the offensive outcome that traditional advertising can often create for people in the minority. This kind of communication is positive: it reflects an advertiser’s respect for the diverse communities it is trying to reach.”

Updated: 11/7/2016 by Saqib Shah: Added statement from Facebook

Saqib Shah
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Saqib Shah is a Twitter addict and film fan with an obsessive interest in pop culture trends. In his spare time he can be…
Facebook won’t ban political ads that lie to voters ahead of the 2020 election
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg

Facebook has decided not to back down from its policy that allows political ads containing false or misleading information ahead of the 2020 U.S. election, choosing instead to allow users to see fewer political ads in their feed.

In an announcement on Thursday, Facebook shared a list of new ad tools that will roll out soon -- and defended its stance on excluding politicians from the rules that prevent most advertisers from lying in an ad.

Read more
Facebook bans misleading content and ads about the 2020 census
facebook independent oversight board mark zuckerberg  viva tech start up

Facebook is taking new initiatives to help protect the 2020 census by banning misleading information and prohibiting ads that shed a negative light on the constitutionally mandated process. 

The social network’s new census interference policy includes prohibiting misrepresentation of dates, times, methods, and the government’s involvement in the census, as well as coordinated interference. The updates were announced in a blog post on Thursday, December 19, and will begin to be enforced starting next month. 

Read more
I paid Meta to ‘verify’ me — here’s what actually happened
An Instagram profile on an iPhone.

In the fall of 2023 I decided to do a little experiment in the height of the “blue check” hysteria. Twitter had shifted from verifying accounts based (more or less) on merit or importance and instead would let users pay for a blue checkmark. That obviously went (and still goes) badly. Meanwhile, Meta opened its own verification service earlier in the year, called Meta Verified.

Mostly aimed at “creators,” Meta Verified costs $15 a month and helps you “establish your account authenticity and help[s] your community know it’s the real us with a verified badge." It also gives you “proactive account protection” to help fight impersonation by (in part) requiring you to use two-factor authentication. You’ll also get direct account support “from a real person,” and exclusive features like stickers and stars.

Read more