wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Facebook’s targeted ads are discriminatory, should be held liable: US DoJ

The United States Department of Justice has sided with (pdf) four housing alliances and housing groups after they accused Facebook of being discriminatory — by excluding people based on sex, race, gender, Zip code or religion – through its targeted ads. These practices were allegedly used by landlords and property dealers on the platform.

The National Fair Housing Alliance, Fair Housing Justice Center Inc, Housing Opportunities Project for Excellence Inc and Fair Housing Council of Greater San Antonio filed the complaint against Facebook.

The US Housing and Urban Development (HUD) department has now filed a complaint against Facebook, accusing the company of housing discrimination and clear violation of the federal fair housing laws, implemented as part of the Civil Rights Act 1968. The complaint by the HUD came on the same day the DoJ targeted Facebook on similar issues. Fair housing activists have told a district court in the US that people have been discriminated even on whether the person had English as Second Language or a Disabled Parking Permit.

Facebook’s ad tools leaving out certain criteria

The crux of the complaint is that Facebook’s targeted advertising tools such as “Boosts” and “Ad Manager” have enabled discrimination by providing property owners and dealers with a mechanism to include some and exclude others. These tools are popularly used to target or narrow down ads and create a custom target audience, thus including or excluding people who will see the ad (on their News feeds) based on the platter of information collected by Facebook. Housing rights activists have argued that both Boosts and Ads Manager allow advertisers, including landlords, developers, and housing service providers, to restrict which Facebook users will see their ads based on criteria that are “explicitly discriminatory.”

“The Fair Housing Act prohibits housing discrimination, including those who might limit or deny housing options with a click of a mouse,” said Anna María Farías, assistant secretary at HUD. She added, “When Facebook uses the vast amount of personal data it collects to help advertisers to discriminate, it’s the same as slamming the door in someone’s face.”

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Facebook says that it is a platform

Facebook’s defense so far has been that it is merely an “interactive computer service” or roughly speaking, a distribution platform, and not a publisher. It asserted that it enjoys immunity under the Communications Decency Act which shields distribution platforms from the actions/content of third parties. This is based on the logic that platforms do not develop or create the content being distributed. The Justice Department, however, has found that Facebook is an “information content provider” which means that Facebook acts like a publisher to a certain extent. According to the US government, Facebook has contributed enough via its targeted ad tools for it to qualify as information content provider; it has developed and curated the content at hand, and not merely hosted it. And hence it is liable.

Facebook can be a publisher and a platform: US DoJ

The US Justice Department is itself questioning whether or not Facebook is a publisher. It has for now justified that it can be either or both, depending on Facebook’s contribution in curating or developing content.

A single website could therefore be an interactive computer service in some respects, and thus entitled to CDA immunity, but an information content provider in others, and thus not immune:

A website operator can be both a service provider and a content provider: If it passively displays content that is created entirely by third parties, then it is only a service provider with respect to that content. But as to content that it creates itself, or is “responsible, in whole or in part” for creating or developing, the website is also a content provider. Thus, a website may be immune from liability for some of the content it displays to the public but be subject to liability for other content.

Written By

I cover health, policy issues such as intermediary liability, data governance, internet shutdowns, and more. Hit me up for tips.

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.



The Delhi High Court should quash the government's order to block Tanul Thakur's website in light of the Shreya Singhal verdict by the Supreme...


Releasing the policy is akin to putting the proverbial 'cart before the horse'.


The industry's growth is being weighed down by taxation and legal uncertainty.


Due to the scale of regulatory and technical challenges, transparency reporting under the IT Rules has gotten off to a rocky start.


Here are possible reasons why Indians are not generating significant IAP revenues despite our download share crossing 30%.

You May Also Like


Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...


135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...


Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...


By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ