Facebook is showing different job ads to women and men in a way that might run afoul of anti-discrimination laws, according to a new study.
University of Southern California researchers who examined the ad-delivery algorithms of Facebook and LinkedIn found that Facebook’s were skewed by gender beyond what can be legally justified by differences in job qualifications.
Men were more likely to see Domino’s pizza delivery driver job ads on Facebook, while women were more likely to see Instacart shopper ads.
The trend also held in higher-paying engineering jobs at tech firms like Netflix and chipmaker Nvidia. A higher fraction of women saw the Netflix ads than the Nvidia ads, which parallels the gender breakdown in each company’s workforce.
No evidence was found of similar bias in the job ads delivered by LinkedIn.
Study author Aleksandra Korolova, an assistant professor of computer science at USC, said it might be that LinkedIn is doing a better job at deliberately tamping down bias, or it might be that Facebook is simply better at picking up real-world cues from its users about gender imbalances and perpetuating them.
“It’s not that the user is saying, ‘Oh, I’m interested in this.’ Facebook has decided on behalf of the user whether they are likely to engage,” she said. “And just because historically a certain group wasn’t interested in engaging in something, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have an opportunity to pursue it, especially in the job category.”
Facebook said in a statement Friday it has been taking meaningful steps to address issues of discrimination in ads.
“Our system takes into account many signals to try and serve people ads they will be most interested in, but we understand the concerns raised in the report,” it said.
Facebook promised to overhaul its ad targeting system in 2019 as part of a legal settlement.
The social network said then it would no longer allow housing, employment or credit ads that target people by age, gender or zip code. It also limited other targeting options so these ads don’t exclude people on the basis of race, ethnicity and other legally protected categories in the US, including national origin and sexual orientation.
Endlessly customizable ad targeting is Facebook’s bread and butter, so any limits placed on its process could hurt the company’s revenue. The ads users see can be tailored down to the most granular details — not just where people live and what websites they visited recently, but whether they’ve gotten engaged in the past six months or share characteristics with people who have recently bought new sneakers, even if they have never expressed interest in doing so themselves.
But even if advertisers can’t do the targeting themselves, the study shows what critics have stressed for years — that Facebook’s own algorithms can discriminate, even if there is no intent from the job advertisers themselves.
“We haven’t seen any public evidence that they are working on the issues related to their algorithms creating discrimination,” Korolova said.
Since it isn’t possible to show every user every advertisement that is targeted at them, Facebook’s software picks what it deems relevant. If more women show interest in certain jobs, the software learns it should show women more of these sorts of ads.
LinkedIn said the study’s findings align with its internal review of job ads targeting.
“However, we recognize that systemic change takes time, and we are at the beginning of a very long journey,” the company said in a statement.
US laws allow for ads to be targeted based on qualifications but not on protected categories such as race, gender and age. But anti-discrimination laws are largely complaint-driven, and no one can complain about being deprived of a job opportunity if they didn’t know it happened to them, said Sandra Wachter, a professor at Oxford University focused on technology law.
“The tools we have developed to prevent discrimination had a human perpetrator in mind,” said Wachter, who was not involved in the USC study. “An algorithm is discriminating very differently, grouping people differently and doing it in a very subtle way. Algorithms discriminate behind your back, basically.”
While Domino’s and Instacart have similar job requirements for their drivers, Domino’s delivery workforce is predominantly male, while Instacart’s is more than half female. The study, which looked at driver ads run in North Carolina compared to demographic data from voter records, found that Facebook’s algorithms appeared to be learning from those gender disparities and perpetuating them.
The same trend also occurred with sales jobs at retailer Reeds Jewelers, which more women saw, and the Leith Automotive dealership, which more men saw.
The researchers call for more rigorous auditing of such algorithms and to look at other factors such as racial bias. Korolova said external audits such as the USC study can only do so much without getting access to Facebook’s proprietary algorithms, but regulators could require some form of independent review to check for discrimination.
“We’ve seen that platforms are not so good at self-policing their algorithms for undesired societal consequences, especially when their business is at stake,” she said.
Study: Facebook delivers biased job ads, skewed by gender
https://arab.news/r3kus
Study: Facebook delivers biased job ads, skewed by gender
- Facebook ads were skewed by gender beyond what can be legally justified by differences in job qualifications, says University of Southern California researchers
US to call for Google to sell Chrome browser: report
- Determining how to address Google’s wrongs is the next stage of a landmark antitrust trial that saw the company in August ruled a monopoly by US District Court Judge Amit Mehta
SAN FRANCISCO: The US will urge a judge to make Google-parent company Alphabet sell its widely used Chrome browser in a major antitrust crackdown on the Internet giant, according to a media report Monday.
Antitrust officials with the US Department of Justice declined to comment on a Bloomberg report that they will ask for a sell-off of Chrome and a shake-up of other aspects of Google’s business in court Wednesday.
Justice officials in October said they would demand that Google make profound changes to how it does business — even considering the possibility of a breakup — after the tech juggernaut was found to be running an illegal monopoly.
The government said in a court filing that it was considering options that included “structural” changes, which could see them asking for a divestment of its smartphone Android operating system or its Chrome browser.
Calling for the breakup of Google would mark a profound change by the US government’s reglators, which have largely left tech giants alone since failing to break up Microsoft two decades ago.
Google dismissed the idea at the time as “radical.”
Adam Kovacevich, chief executive of industry trade group Chamber of Progress, released a statement arguing that what justice officials reportedly want is “fantastical” and defies legal standards, instead calling for narrowly tailored remedies.
Determining how to address Google’s wrongs is the next stage of a landmark antitrust trial that saw the company in August ruled a monopoly by US District Court Judge Amit Mehta.
Requiring Google to make its search data available to rivals was also on the table.
Regardless of Judge Mehta’s eventual decision, Google is expected to appeal the ruling, potentially prolonging the process for years and possibly reaching the US Supreme Court.
The trial, which concluded last year, scrutinized Google’s confidential agreements with smartphone manufacturers, including Apple.
These deals involve substantial payments to secure Google’s search engine as the default option on browsers, iPhones and other devices.
The judge determined that this arrangement provided Google with unparalleled access to user data, enabling it to develop its search engine into a globally dominant platform.
From this position, Google expanded its tech empire to include the Chrome browser, Maps and the Android smartphone operating system.
According to the judgment, Google controlled 90 percent of the US online search market in 2020, with an even higher share, 95 percent, on mobile devices.
Remedies being sought will include imposing measures curbing Google artificial intelligence from tapping into website data and barring the Android mobile operating system from being bundled with the company’s other offerings, according to the report.
Roblox tightens messaging rules for under-13 users amid abuse concerns
- Video game maker said it removed ability to message others outside games on its platform for users under-13
- Roblox said it will also allow parents and caregivers to remotely manage their child’s Roblox account
LONDON: Video game maker Roblox said on Monday that it is implementing new safety measures for users under 13, including permanently removing the ability to message others outside games on its platform.
However, under-13 users can still message others in-game with parental consent.
The gaming platform, which reported around 89 million users last quarter, said it will allow parents and caregivers to remotely manage their child’s Roblox account, view friend lists, set spending controls, and manage screen time.
Roblox has faced claims of child abuse on its platform. In August, Turkiye blocked access to Roblox following a court order, as prosecutors investigated concerns about user-generated content potentially leading to abuse.
A 2022 lawsuit filed in San Francisco claimed that Roblox facilitated the sexual and financial exploitation of a California girl by adult men, allegedly encouraging her to drink, abuse prescription drugs, and share sexually explicit photos.
The company said it has also introduced a built-in setting that will let users under the age of 13 access public broadcast messages only within games or experiences.
Roblox will replace age-based content labels with descriptors ranging from “Minimal” to “Restricted,” indicating the type of content users can expect. By default, users under nine can only access games labeled “Minimal” or “Mild.”
These new restrictions will also prevent users under 13 from searching, discovering, or playing unlabeled experiences, the company said.
Restricted content will remain inaccessible until a user is at least 17 years old and has verified their age.
Twitch adds ‘Zionist’ to hate speech policy amid war tensions
- Amazon-owned streaming platform said term will still be allowed in discussions about political movement as long as they do not target individuals
- Decision follows pressure by US lawmakers and ADL, who accuse Twitch of failing to curb antisemitism on its platform
LONDON: Streaming platform Twitch has updated its hate speech policy to include the term “Zionist” as a potential slur, reflecting heightened sensitivity in online moderation amid escalating tensions stemming from Israel’s war on Gaza and Lebanon.
“Starting today, using the term ‘Zionist’ to attack or demean another individual or group of people on the basis of their background or religious belief is against our rules,” Twitch, owned by Amazon, announced in a blog post.
The platform, widely popular among video gamers, clarified that as “Zionist” and “Zionism” are political terms, they will still be allowed in discussions about the political movement, whether supportive or critical, provided the language does not target individuals.
“Our goal isn’t to stifle conversation about or criticism of an institution or ideology, but to prevent coded hate directed at individuals and groups of people,” the company said.
The policy update comes amid a spike in hateful content on social media platforms following the Oct. 7 attacks.
A report released in June by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue highlighted alarming increases in antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric online, including a 51-fold surge in antisemitic comments on YouTube and a 422 percent rise in anti-Muslim hate speech on X.
Twitch’s move follows pressure from US Congressman Ritchie Torres and the Anti-Defamation League.
In a letter to Twitch executives, Torres criticized the platform’s handling of hate speech, singling out prominent Turkish-American streamer Hasan Piker as a “poster child” for what he described as “terrorism apologist” comments following the Oct. 7 events.
Torres, who recently secured re-election with significant support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, accused Twitch of failing to adequately address antisemitic content and called for stricter moderation.
Twitch’s announcement aligns it with other platforms tightening their moderation policies.
In July, Meta began removing posts targeting “Zionists” when the term was used to demean Jewish people or Israelis, rather than in reference to the political movement.
This step followed allegations that Meta mishandled pro-Palestinian content, including findings from an Arab News investigation last year.
Netflix says 50 million households worldwide tuned in for Paul-Tyson match
Netflix said on Saturday that 60 million households worldwide had tuned in for the highly anticipated boxing match between Jake Paul and Mike Tyson, and the event peaked at 65 million streams, according to a statement.
The bout between the 27-year-old social media influencer-turned-prize fighter Paul and the 58-year-old former heavyweight champion Tyson, which Paul won, was streamed live on Netflix.
Nearly 50 million households tuned in for the co-main event between Ireland’s lightweight champion Katie Taylor and Puerto Rico’s featherweight champion Amanda Serrano, according to Netflix.
“The bout is likely to be the most watched professional women’s sporting event in US history,” Netflix said in its statement.
There were some hiccups during the live-stream of the match, with over 90,000 users reporting problems on Netflix at its peak, according to outage tracking website Downdetector.
However, the streaming platform was back up on Saturday after the outage that lasted roughly 6 hours in the United States.
Renowned Lebanese journalist quits MTV over death threats by alleged Hezbollah supporters
- ‘I decided to leave MTV because of the intimidations that reached the point of death threats,’ says Dr. Eman Shweikh on X
- Samir Kassir Eyes Center reports that since Nov. 12 Shweikh had been subjected to a campaign of threats, incitement, accusations of treason
DUBAI: A renowned Lebanese journalist has taken to social media platform X to announce her departure from MTV following alleged death threats believed to have been made by supporters of Hezbollah.
Not mentioning the Iran-backed group by name, Dr. Eman Shweikh, a TV presenter at MTV, journalist and university professor, wrote: “I decided to leave MTV because of the intimidations that reached the point of death threats and the harassment that I am exposed to, which reached the point of following me home and chasing me on the road, in addition to harassing my family.”
The Samir Kassir Eyes Center reported that since Nov. 12 Shweikh had been subjected to a campaign of threats, incitement and accusations of treason due to her political opinions that she publishes on X, and because of her work for MTV.
The purported threats and harassment prompted her to leave her job at the channel.
The TV presenter added in her tweet: “The (Lebanese) state is absent, and laws are inexistent, and I do not want to expose my life and the lives of my family to danger. I want to live in safety and peace. Thank you to the Chairman of the Board of Directors of MTV Michel Murr.”
Shweikh’s tweet received thousands of likes and hundreds of retweets and comments.
Speaking to Arab News, Shweikh said things got worse since the escalation between Israel and Hezbollah.
“In addition to the threats from Hezbollah supporters, my old friends sent me very negative comments, saying they wouldn’t allow me to enter the south, where my family house is located in Tyre, or return to my hometown of Al-Mansoury, she said.
“Some relatives even threatened to send me to Syria to be killed by criminals. I believe that the best decision for me now was to quit my job, although I am very sad and shocked. However, I believe that Hezbollah’s control will end very soon.
“As for my plans, I am ready to work as an anchor or perhaps a TV hostess, but I will not declare my political opinions until the appropriate moment,” she added.
Replying to her tweet, advocate Tarek Chindeb said: “The threat to kill journalist Eman Shweikh makes us believe at every moment that we cannot build a state in Lebanon in the presence of illegal weapons and militias outside accountability.”
Expressing solidarity, Chindeb hoped that the Lebanese security and judicial authorities would do their duty to protect her, and arrest the culprits.
Political analyst Magdi Khalil also replied to Shweikh’s tweet, saying: “Ideological militias do not know participation, but rather overpowering. They do not know dialogue, but rather the threat of violence.”
MTV journalist Nawal Berry and cameraman Dany Tanios were attacked in July while attempting to cover the aftermath of an Israeli airstrike on Beirut’s southern suburb, a Hezbollah stronghold.
It was not the first time Berry and her team had been assaulted by Hezbollah loyalists. During the early days of the Oct. 17 revolution in 2019, she and her team faced a violent attack and had their camera smashed.
Supporters of Hezbollah have a history of assaulting and threatening journalists. Targets have included Layal Alekhtiar, who received death threats in 2021 and faced legal action last year for interviewing an Israeli spokesperson; Dima Sadek; Ali Al-Amin; and others.
At the time of publishing, Shweikh could not be reached for comment.
