[wesammikhail]

Serious question: How is that relevant though?

Here is how I think about it: If my intention is to discriminate against men and publish an ad in a female magazine, sure, I cant control if a man buys and sees the ad or not. But discrimination was my intention to begin with regardless of how effective my efforts were. Besides, those efforts will be pretty effective. Instead of magazine advertising being 100% effective - as is in the case of FB targeted advertising - they will be just slightly less effective (lets say 90% or w/e number you want to put here). That´s because in the magazine´s case we know for certain that that vast majority of female magazine consumption is done by women - That´s literally what they are made for.

So in a sense, we are arguing about degrees of effectiveness rather than the nature of discrimination. Not only is this a slippery slope, but imo it flips everything in business on its head as having a target audience for your product or a service will be considered discriminatory!

[heavyset_go]

> Not only is this a slippery slope, but imo it flips everything in business on its head as having a target audience for your product or a service will be considered discriminatory!

No, it doesn't. If you determine that your target audience watches BET, and you decide to only advertise your product on BET, that's 100% legal.

If you prevented anyone but your target audience from using your service, and you end up discriminating against a protected class, that's a different story.

There are entirely different standards when it comes to hiring and employment.

[scarface74]

There is no need for slippery slopes or hypotheticals. All physical advertising platforms have policies against discrimination for job ads and rentals. Newspapers have had stricter requirements for those two areas for years and there are specific laws governing them. Just because it is “on the internet” doesn’t change anything.

Yes you can advertise jobs in Ebony or Cosmopolitan. There is nothing stopping a non Black or man from picking up those magazines.

[shkkmo]

> How is that relevant though?

It is not. Your intent to discriminate is not necessary for you to fall afoul of US equal opportunity laws. Demonstrating disparate impact of your employment policies on a protected class without a valid business is can be sufficient for you to lose your case.

[dlp211]

Facebook is way more like a newspaper than a target demo periodical but even when you put the Ad in Cosmo, you pay for the Ad impression no matter who views the Ad. You, as the advertiser have no control over that impression.

[caf]

If it were common for, say, nursing positions to be advertised in Cosmo, then presumably male nurses looking for work would know this and be able to buy that magazine.