Aren’t women generally considered lower risk for insurance? Less risk of needing to pay out means more profit for the insurance companies. Plus of course not having your ads shown to 50% of the population. Seems like it should be the advertisers going after Facebook for this directly.
Speaking of FB ads I’ve noticed a rise in trash ads that show big breasted woman for things that have nothing to do with boobs. I remember during the home refinancing boom I was bombarded with ads from mortgage companies slapping a photo of a chesty woman on them.
same. I use facebook container extension on firefox, and do not have the app on my phone. I have noticed this as well, it doesnt matter how man pages i block and mark “i dont want to see this kind of contect” it just keeps coming.
Regulations exist to protect people from corporations.
I know Facebook sucks, you know Facebook sucks, but Facebook spends billions of dollars to convince hundreds of millions of people they don’t suck, and it’s extremely effective.
I get the impulse to say, “you should know better than you go to Facebook for important info”, but the fact is, a lot of people do go to Facebook for important info, so it’s critical that Facebook is held accountable to their de facto position as an objective source of information.
Id imagine the issue isn’t “not showing some people ads”, they probably just got different ads instead if these are the regularly placed ads being talked about.
The article mentions something about this being started by someone who went to Facebook looking for an insurance provider though, so this sounds more like if Amazon didn’t show certain product listings to people of some specific category for one reason or another- those listings are technically advertising a product, but they’re something one actually does want to see, when shopping for something relevant to the listing at least. If, say, some company wanted to offer a product at a discount, but only wanted to offer that discount to a certain category of person for some reason, it’d be pretty scummy of the online retailer to comply and only show other people that product at the more expensive price, or not at all.
If, say, some company wanted to offer a product at a discount, but only wanted to offer that discount to a certain category of person for some reason
That’s literally how the entire insurance industry works in the first place. So I wonder, is there a special exception that insurance companies get that Facebook does not?
Might it depend on the specifics? Im unsure what the relevant laws are here, but it’s easy to imagine that offering a special discount to, say, non-smokers, would be considered far more acceptable than offering a discount only to men
Would you feel differently if they weren’t showing real estate ads for homes in largely white communities to PoC? Because that’s the same principle, given that that’s why the law was made. I’m not upset that we’re enforcing nondiscrimination law; we don’t do it enough.
Add comment