Talk about an opinionated headline. If you read TFA, the word "alleges" is used quite often, but the headline itself is not only an indictment of guild, but framed in such a way as if it's an obvious and known fact that Facebook's ad targeting is both sexist and ageist.
But let's back up a second. Facebook isn't doing the targeting; the advertisers are. Facebook is providing a tool not unlike those found on other ad networks. Demographic targeting is how practically all ads are done, and age and sex are probably the two biggest. This type of targeting isn't refusal of service to protected classes.
Is it California's stance that advertisers must now waste money advertising to groups who, by definition, have zero interest in the products advertised? Because of this ruling, will teen boys now have to see ads for menopause support supplements?
I loathe Facebook. I hate advertising. But this ruling is absurd, and I expect it will be overturned on appeal.
But let's back up a second. Facebook isn't doing the targeting; the advertisers are. Facebook is providing a tool not unlike those found on other ad networks. Demographic targeting is how practically all ads are done, and age and sex are probably the two biggest. This type of targeting isn't refusal of service to protected classes.
Is it California's stance that advertisers must now waste money advertising to groups who, by definition, have zero interest in the products advertised? Because of this ruling, will teen boys now have to see ads for menopause support supplements?
I loathe Facebook. I hate advertising. But this ruling is absurd, and I expect it will be overturned on appeal.